Bugfixing mode and checkin email


When we check in changes to our product, it's traditional to send check-in email to the people that are impacted (and, if the emails I get are any indication, a dozen people pulled randomly from the Microsoft address book as well).


These emails usually say something like:


Fixed bug #11881 - added support for negative anti-pressure to the gravitational support code.


or sometimes just:


#11911


Where the numbers are bug numbers in our bug tracking system (named Product Studio but often referred to as Raid, after it's predecessor). A seemingly irrelevant piece of info that should become slightly more relevant in the near future.


Back in April, I'd just listened my way through the Hitchiker's Guide radio shows, and decided to write my checkin email in the form of a radio drama.


Which I would have shared with you, except for the fact that I'm not allowed to talk about what I've been doing (yet...).


In the weeks that followed, I did a scene from a bad sci-fi movie, a Led Zeppelin takeoff ("Fixed a whole lotta bugs"), a bit of Dickens, and ...


Well, you get the idea.


Some of them pretty funny, some of them not really that funny, but none of them fit to share.


This morning, however, I wrote one that I think I can share with you (or, at least that part without the bug details), so here it is:


Checkin mail: Bug Fixes


It was a hot day, hotter than I was used to.

 

The first two hours had gone well. 800 feet of climbing up Lakemont, down the south side, and then around the south end of the lake. The sun was shining, the wind was fresh off the lake, and the "beep beep" of forklifts announced to all around that the time Seafair was near.

 

It all started to deteriorate near the U. The heat, the pavé that passes for pavement on the Burke, and the earlyness of my start all weighed on my weary quads. Juanita hill passed slowly, made tolerable only by an encounter with a fellow sufferer near the top. Market street further lowered my spirits.

 

And there remained only one more hill. I took it slowly and steadily, finding a rythm that worked well. I was halfway up when the wispy thread of a thought burst forth, shouting, "Hey moron, you need some salt. Find a place to get some".

 

After half a bag of beef jerky, the snack food with the highest sodium/weight ratio, I continued on my way, arriving home just under the four hour mark. As I dragged myself into the kitchen, my wife asked, "Good ride?"

 

"No", I said. "But I did resolve 16 bugs in Product Studio".

 

....

 

There are those who think I watch too much TV...


Comments (5)

  1. Tim says:

    "There are those who think I watch too much TV…"

    I think they might be right.

    My group does the same thing. I get an email that an issue has been assigned to me. Recently an automated system was put in to notify me of the same thing. So now I get at least two emails for each issue, and sometimes more as someone adds comments. I’ve had a few recipients put "Unsubcribe" as a joke on the high volume ones.

    Have you tried a Dr. Suess rhyme, or Harry Potter, or Star Trek beam me up? The possiblities are endless.

  2. Anil says:

    You could run for the Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest .It’s gone to a microsftie this year.Maybe microsoft will have a leading share here as well 😉

    Take a look at this –

    Carburettor breast fantasy wins bad writing prize @

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200507/s1425265.htm

  3. Umer says:

    Hello Mr. Eric,

    C# 2.0 supports many new and interesting features amongst them is that u can set a modifier on the setter or getter of a property.

    I want to know can I do something like this in an interface as below:

    interface IMicrosoft

    {

    List<Employee> Employees {get; internal set;}

    List<Product> Products {get; protected set;}

    }

    and then do something like below:

    public class MicrosoftOrganisation : IMicrosoft

    {

    private List<Employee> employees

    public List<Employee> Employee

    {

    get{ return employees; }

    internal set { employees = value; }

    }

    //…….. and then the others are implemented

    }

    because i wanted to do something like the above and I got like thousands of errors.

    Can u tell me using a blog post why this doesnt work and whats the workaround of this or give a link to the solution.

    Umer.

Skip to main content