Re: How long should it take to fix a obvious memory leak?

["Jasper St. Pierre" <jstpierre mecheye net>]

We're not suggesting anything of the sort. We're saying that PyGTK+ hasn't been touched in two years. If this patch lands today, can we ensure that a new release of PyGTK+ is sent to distributions? Will you take the responsibility to make a new release, a new tarball, etc?

If it simply lands in git and that's it, why do it at all?

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Ma Xiaojun <damage3025 gmail com> wrote:

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:27 PM, Andre Klapper <ak-47 gmx net> wrote:
> Likely a long time for an unmaintained module that has not seen any code
> activity for years: https://git.gnome.org/browse/pygtk/log/
>
> Maybe you have some luck to find a developer on
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/python-hackers-list .
> However I don't expect anybody to create a new tarball of pygtk that
> distros would pick up and ship, so not sure how much sense this makes.
>
> This touches a general unsolved issue: Sharing the maintenance burden of
> deprecated modules across distributors who ship enterprise / long-term
> support versions. Same problem e.g. for gnome-vfs, libgnome, ...
> I guess if somebody offered maintainership, nobody would refuse.

It's all logistics issues on your side; I don't care about the
community dynamics.
I just care how GNOME community as a whole treat third-party developers.

It boils down simply to a trivial reference counting issue. "People
urge to have this bug fixed " has nothing to do with "people want to
take over PyGTK".

_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list gnome org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

--
  Jasper