On Wednesday 06 July 2011 22:41:25 Alan McKinnon wrote: > On Wednesday 06 July 2011 22:02:03 pk did opine thusly: > > > Devs get a certain amount of leeway and tolerance from users> > because of what they do as volunteers. But there's a line> > somewhere and in my view arbitrarily deciding to obsolete a> > toolkit just because you feel> > > Yes, but what can we do about it? Force him (I assume he's> volunteering and is not payed for his work) to continue supporting> it? Well, I assume we could pay him... or something. > Well, there's really only one thing that appeals to your average devin any area: > Treat them like a dev and appeal to their better judgement. > One can recognise that a dev is acting like a total dick, but pointingit out gets you nowhere. I refer you to my vast experience ofattempting to do the same with the devs I work with :-) It alsoapplies to sysadmins, people who (embarrassingly) point out that I ama complete jerk lots of the time tend to get nowhere to. > Reasoned, well supported arguments coupled with a little ego-strokingis what motivates most devs. Nikos' last comment on the bug is a goodone - asking for a list of supported gnome apps in the tree thatrequire gtk+-2. > It does require that one put aside one's urges to pull this off. Priceof the trade we work in, I suppose.
and/or take the whole mess to -dev... I couldn't care less about gtk stuff - but forcing gtk3 just because - and that on a package where gtk3 is the worse choice... not a smart move. -- #163933
