Houston, we have a problem.

[Marc Mutz]

On Friday 06 September 2002 03:31, Andreas Pour wrote:
> Marc Mutz wrote:
<snip>
> > Don't you think it would be way more prudent to make a patch fixing
> > the problem or - failing that - at least to not write such
> > senseless me-too mails?
>
> I think this "make a patch" response gets out of hand.  It is a fine
> response to a feature request, but not to a bug.  Or do you think a
> maintainer of a KDE app should always be able to say, "I won't fix a
> bug unless you send a patch"?

You misunderstand. The response is
"As stated in the mail you just replied to, we know about this problem, 
but it's not high-priority, since there is a well-known workaround 
(don't use auto-key-retrieve) and there are other bugs that are more 
serious (e.g. because there is no workaround or it crashes) and we have 
only so much time."

> One very practical reason not to use this approach is that it would
> take me, e.g., 100 times as long to fix a bug as it would take you,
<snip>

I reckon _some_ people that complained would probably have also been 
around 10 times faster at fixing this than anyone of us ;-)

> It does seem a rather strong case has been made for why Don's patch
> is not appropriate at this juncture.  Any particular reason Don has
> not presented his point of view?
<snip>

I can't comment on that.

Marc

-- 
Mutig warf sich die kleine Überwachungskamera zwischen Täter und Opfer!
                                        --Rena Tangens / FoeBuD e.V.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20020906/f352b817/attachment.sig>