Don't track bugs, fix them

twitter thread - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;allenholub&#x2F;status&#x2F;1496326760719216643" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;allenholub&#x2F;status&#x2F;1496326760719216643</a> Not my article and I don&#x27;t even necessarily fully agree - but I thought this might spark some interesting discussion on HN.<p>Seems to be a difficult way to go once you&#x27;re past the early stages of a project. I can&#x27;t imagine a team at a say Series B&#x2F;C startup pausing long enough to test their codebase thoroughly, if they were not already doing it to some reasonable degree.<p>Tweet below and the second below it, call out non-eng users and priority as two good reasons to have a tracker and I agree with that <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;mekkaokereke&#x2F;status&#x2F;1497267436315312128?s=20&amp;t=4Nw1crTIHE05bOV9yuZpJw" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;mekkaokereke&#x2F;status&#x2F;1497267436315312128?...</a>

I love ideas like this; radical flip-the-script concepts that you basically can&#x27;t incrementally apply but I do believe it worked for the author, and can work for others.<p>Stuff we could never have done from the beginning, but can basically undo the patches we&#x27;ve applied to fix issues that no longer apply.