Re: Bug#224742 acknowledged by developer (Re: Bug#224742: Related to this issue...)
Scripsit Tollef Fog Heen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> * Henning Makholm
> | Quite right - nothing at all compels him to do anything at all to
> | *implement* the request. He seems to also want the power to prevent
> | people from at all voicing requests he does not like. That is *not*
> | fair. It is hiding problems.
> The BTS is not a dumping ground for random wishlist request.
> The only reasons for leaving wontfix + wishlist requests open are if
> upstream doesn't want to implement it himself (not the case here) or
> upstream will refuse a patch.
How is that not the case here? It is completely well-documented that
upsteam *doesn't* not want to implement it himself, and there is every
indication that upstream would refuse a patch if somebody made it.
> Why leave it open?
To Not Hide Problems<tm>. To document the technical issues that people
have. To let the next maintainer  know that the wish exists, and
perhaps also why it might not be a good idea to implement it anyway
(though that sorta supposes that those who know of real reasons not to
implement it *disclose* those reason rather than just trying to
threaten not-knows into silence).
 None of us are going to live forever.
> | Why isn't the "close bugs to repress requests that I don't like" game
> | just as silly?
> Because wishlist requests in the BTS are the domain of the maintainer,
> not the user.
Why *should* it me the maintainer's domain to squelch deviant thought
in this way?
Henning Makholm "Jeg køber intet af Sulla, og selv om uordenen griber
planmæssigt om sig, så er vi endnu ikke nået dertil hvor
ordentlige mennesker kan tillade sig at stjæle slaver fra
hinanden. Så er det ligegyldigt, hvor stærke, politiske modstandere vi er."