[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#224742 acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#224742: Related to this issue...)

Scripsit Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>

> > The maintainer's insisting on closing the wishlist
> > item simply because he disagrees with the way the reporter wants to
> > use the software, seems very misplaced. 

> If you want a favour done, acting obnoxiously and trying to make it into
> a demand seems more out of place.

Who's acting obnoxiously and insisting to speak of a feature *request*
as if it was a *demand*?

> I'm happy to do the same thing for any other maintainer who is being
> attacked by someone who's trying to use the BTS reopen command to force
> a maintainer to do things against their better judgement.

In which way is a wishlist item an "attack"? In which way do you think
a wishlist item could conveivably be used to force a maintainer to do
anything at all? Where is the "force" you speak about?

> Well *someone's* misunderstood something. Given I'm a BTS admin, given
> that I created the "wontfix" tag, and given that I've been around longer
> than Enrico, are you sure you're not jumping to the wrong conclusion?

So - proof by authority?

Henning Makholm                                  "Panic. Alarm. Incredulity.
                                   *Thing* has not enough legs. Topple walk.
                                  Fall over not. Why why why? What *is* it?"

Reply to: