Re: On maintainers not responding to bugs
Don Armstrong <email@example.com> writes:
> Nothing that has been discussed in this thread necessarily means
> that an actual human being has done anything, as it's trivial to
> write an automated response bot for maintainers for every bug.
In the bug submitter's perspective, even notification of having done
triage is far better than no feedback about the content of the report
(and yes, "we have sent your message to a human" counts as "no
feedback" for this purpose since it gives no feedback about the
content of the report).
> The goal appears to be to have bugs responded to instantly by
> maintainers and fixed rapidly.
That's not how I've read it. The goal as I understood the OP was to
discourage letting bugs (of 'normal' severity or above) sit
unacknowledged while the package moves forward with further
uploads. There was nothing in the proposal about addressing the speed
> While that's a very laudable goal, technical impedances to a
> maintainer actually getting useful and important work done is not
> the way to do that.
Even though (as I described above) the goal is more modest than you
describe, I must admit to misgivings about using a stick rather than a
carrot to achieve it.
I am, though, very interested in seeing that people don't attack straw
men in this discussion.
\ "The best ad-libs are rehearsed." -- Graham Kennedy |