Bill Cox <waywardg...@gmail.com> wrote: > I just can't find a way to > diplomatically deal with people who are not passionate about > accessibility. What I hear so far is "reformat the patch", "submit it > as a Gail bug, not a GTK bug", and "I don't think thats the right > approach". What I need to be a passionate supporter of GTK > accessibility is a developer who says "your approach sucks, but I > fixed it, and committed an accessibility upgrade".
It's normal in free/open software for someone who reviews a patch to request that the submitter improve it to make it acceptable by the project. In other words, what you received was a code review. I expect this is how they would respond to any patch you sent, accessibility-related or not. If you want more than a review, (for example, assistance in the design or writing of the change) then you'd presumably have to engage on a mailing list or IRC. I don't think this is a case of "not being passionate about accessibility", but rather a question of different expectations as to how patches submitted in bug reports should be handled. From what I've seen on mailing lists over the years, the responses you received are just a normal part of the course for open software development. If you went ahead and did what they asked of you, or tried to fclarify it appropriately, you would probably make more progress. _______________________________________________ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
