"cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> By not answering there's no way for the submitter to know which of the above
> applies, it's an issue of not leaving users in uncertainty about what is
> going on.
>
> A simple 1 line reply is enough to remove that uncertainty:
> - this t
On Tuesday 21 March 2006 20:43, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So a mere non-reply does not, it seems to me, connote anything bad; it
> may simply mean that the bug report is complete in itself, and well
> get attention when I decide I have the attention
Nathanael Nerode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Some few maintainers are obnoxious and anti-helpful. All of these
> have bugs which have had a patch attached to them for a long time
> without mantainer comment (not even 'no, this patch doesn't work
> because X'). However, not all such bugs reflec
Me:
> [In the hypothetical case] I write to the maintainer
> of P but get no reply. After repeating this a few times I (finally!)
> get a message from the P maintainer... about his having more important
> things to do than deal with my patch. [...]
Frans Pop:
> Alternative conclusion to this saga
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
So yes, I believe we need to work on the long-term "ignored" bugs. :)
Those are essentially all I work on.
It's a good thing I have a thick skin. Some maintainers are genuinely grateful
for the
assistance, and they're a pleasure to work with. (This includes the X
On Monday 20 March 2006 16:04, Thomas Hood wrote:
> It might not be so simple. Suppose I have taken it upon myself to push
> change Foo through Debian. The Foo project requires cooperation from
> several DDs and at the beginning I can't tell whether I will get that
> cooperation from all of them.
Russ Allbery wrote:
> Whenever this topic comes up on debian-devel, the conversation seems to
> focus on the small minority of maintainers who don't respond to bugs, are
> still active on their packages, resist any attempt at co-maintainership,
> and can't be dealt with through the MIA process.
Y
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 12:44:05PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>> I believe you are wrong. If you are right, then I am a very impolite
>> maintainer, as I have too many packages with too many bugs to look
>> after, so I do not manage to look at, nor
[Olaf van der Spek]
> So what do you think about long-term ignored bug reports? Do you
> think that should not be considered any issue/problem?
It is definitely something we should try to address. When I run into
those myself for issues that are important to me, I try to contact the
maintainer,
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 12:44:05PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> [Sven Luther]
> > I am not saying that there needs to be an immediate response, or all
> > patches need to be applied, but i believe that it is elementary
> > politeness from a package maintainer, to at least aknowledge a pat
On 3/19/06, Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [Sven Luther]
> > I am not saying that there needs to be an immediate response, or all
> > patches need to be applied, but i believe that it is elementary
> > politeness from a package maintainer, to at least aknowledge a patch
> > or b
[Sven Luther]
> I am not saying that there needs to be an immediate response, or all
> patches need to be applied, but i believe that it is elementary
> politeness from a package maintainer, to at least aknowledge a patch
> or bug report when it is submitted.
I believe you are wrong. If you are
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 08:29:18AM +0100, Martin Wuertele wrote:
> * Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-19 08:06]:
>
> > The question is if the problems with the patches and the reason for not
> > applying it will be commented, thus giving the author a chance to modify it,
> > or change his
On 3/19/06, Martin Wuertele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-19 08:06]:
>
> > The question is if the problems with the patches and the reason for not
> > applying it will be commented, thus giving the author a chance to modify it,
> > or change his approach to
* Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-19 08:06]:
> The question is if the problems with the patches and the reason for not
> applying it will be commented, thus giving the author a chance to modify it,
> or change his approach to fixing the bug, or if the patch will be utherly
> ignored, whic
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 04:01:58PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> You missed the sarcasm. I understood Daniel's point to be that just
> because a patch is syntatically correct doesn't mean that it will (or
> should) be applied.
The question is if the problems with the patches and the reason for n
16 matches
Mail list logo
