On Sat, 20 Aug 2022 13:26:14 +0100 Brian <a...@cityscape.co.uk> wrote:
>Reasons for the perceived "ignored" status might be: > > * The maintainer judges that the bug affects very few users. > * The maintainer does not have the resources to deal with the bug. > * A solution is already in hand and awaiting upload to unstable. > * The maintainer puts the report on the back burner and forgets about > it. > * The bug is low down on the priority list. > * The maintainer sees the bug as a user issue and not an issue with > package quality. > * The maintainer has little or nothing to contribute that would lead > to the report progressing. > * Fixing this issue is not worth the effort, if possible at all. > No, these are (more or less reasonable) grounds for not getting *to work* on some potential issue, and that is what you state yourself! With one exception--a fix warranting no further comment is imminent--none of these points however justifies providing no *feedback* to begin with, and if it's a won't-fix/don't care plus signature. In fact, most if not all would seem to explicitly ask for it. I'd even think there might well be less reason for interaction other than the auto confirmation once some change is pending, especially if it's obvious. As I understand it though Chuck is not primarily complaining about ignored issues. But about ignored reporters. We are a peoples project? And while I perfectly understand there can be countless causes *even* preventing maintainers from providing feedback, whether timely or long-time, this is simply an entirely different matter and would have to be explained in another way. At least this is getting us somewhere: > >Neither should a user have any expectation of a timely interaction, >nice though it may be to be get further involvement from a maintainer. So be it. If also a rule I'm afraid it's probably about as old as Debian and a rather antiquated conception of software development or the expectations of its wider ecosystem. Nor does volunteering in itself relieve you from certain minimal considerations that naturally arise when contributing to what is ultimately a social enterprise. Not to mention that, hopefully, all testing and bug reporting here is just as voluntary. ;) It's the whole point, isn't it? And if consideration means to, perhaps temporarily, *visibly* suspend some role when there's not enough time or more pressing issues, or at least to leave some clue to that effect somewhere, like on a personal website, as some have done. Pushing issues into some black hole however isn't exactly enticing, I can easily imagine technically advanced users instead rather sorting some things out themselves immediately, locally, and from experience just forgo the BTS altogether. Oliver
