The point is you should be able to do that, or try to reproduce it in a recent version.[/quote]
I don’t know if you realize this, but in aggregate that means a huge amount of effort. You can search the bug tracker to see if something matches, and you can try it on the latest experimental, these things are considered basic due diligence, because you know the bug the best, since you found it.
Feel free to report them, but if you report errors from a months-old version of the game and refuse to try and reproduce them on a recent version, they’re probably going to be dropped because chances are they’ve been fixed, and that means the expected payoff for checking them is nil. We’re just explaining how the process works. The expectation with a bug report is that it’s causing you a problem now, and with releases, the ONLY fix there is is moving to a newer version of the game, so we suggest you try that first, there is no value to a bug report for a problem that has already been fixed.
This doesn’t make sense, we’re not even looking at 0.A at this point, it was just a snapshot in time from months ago, what we’re improving on today is the game as it is today.
It’s not information if it’s an issue that has been fixed, it’s noise, and that is a problem.
Do you have any idea how many bug reports you’re talking about? It’s many hundreds if not thousands, it’s not sensible at all.
What you generally do in this case is have a set of features you test, and you test those. Sometimes when you have automated testing set up, you write tests while you’re in the process of fixing a bug, and you leave the test lying around to catch it just in case it crops up later, but generally even with automated testing, you test that things work, not for the absence of particular bugs.
