[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>

> 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.

So you think it is OK to be "blunt" whan somebody disagrees with you,
and gives coherent technical arguments for disagreeing? Where are your
technical arguments?

> > > 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.

In which way is reopening a bug that was apparently closed in error an

You forgot to answer: In which way could reopening a bug conceivably
be a means to "force" the maintainer to do anything? Where and what is
the "force" you're thinking about.

> 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.

Enricon tried the first option and got flames and threats in response.

> > So - proof by authority?

> It was a serious question:

I know a rhetorical question when I see one.

> I obviously have more experience here than Enrico; what exactly
> makes you think he's right and I'm not?

The transactions of the wishlist item were, at that time, publically
accessible in the BTS; I had the opportunity to judge the matter
according to what was said and done rather than just base guessework
on the identities involved in the case.

Henning Makholm          "Den nyttige hjemmedatamat er og forbliver en myte.
                    Generelt kan der ikke peges på databehandlingsopgaver af
                  en sådan størrelsesorden og af en karaktér, som berettiger
              forestillingerne om den nye hjemme- og husholdningsteknologi."

Reply to: