On Fri, Dec 26, 2003 at 08:33:49AM +0000, Henning Makholm wrote: > Who's acting obnoxiously and insisting to speak of a feature *request* > as if it was a *demand*? I give up, who is? ] > test-missing-cable really needs no arguments. However, ifupdown chokes ] > on it: ] ] Yes, that's correct. Use: ] ] test-missing-cable yes ] ] instead. was my first response. It got more blunt when the reply to that was: ] That'd be stupid: as "test-missing-cable no" would be nonsense, it's ] crazy to ask the user to put "yes" there. I've solved removing the '-' ] after "test" on all directives, instead, which makes more sense. and an ever-so-productive reopen war. > > 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"? Filing a bug isn't an attack. Repeatedly reopening a bug is. Repetedly reassigning a bug is too. Repeatedly filing new bugs is as well. If you have some feature you want added that the package maintainer doesn't think is desirable, you either persuade him/her to change his/her mind, learn to live without it, or if it's important enough you take the issue up with the technical committee. Repeatedly reopening/reassigning/refiling bugs doesn't fit any of those categories, and is both inappropriate and unproductive, and wanton misuse of the BTS. > > 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? It was a serious question: I obviously have more experience here than Enrico; what exactly makes you think he's right and I'm not? You know the saying, "the race isn't always to the swift, but that's the way to bet" right? Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we can. http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004
Attachment:
pgprQXdIm3H1M.pgp
Description: PGP signature