Re: [ANN] mc^2


On Sun, 10 May 2015 21:01:38 +0200
Egmont Koblinger <egmont gmail com> wrote:


Your arguments make me feel that you're personally offended because
your pet peeve bug didn't get fixed so far, and in turn you'd like to
stop getting something new accepted, just because you'd do it

Come on, how can I stop something new being accepted if I can't get
even a reasonable response and dialog from maintainers regarding a
5-year old issue with 2-years old patch at iteration #5, to which
maintainers themselves contributed?. You overestimate my powers.
Otherwise, I do feel for any contributor who submits patches and get
~zero response, so only glad for Mooffie whose patch spurred so
unbelievable for this mailing list's last year (or that years?)
discussion. (No conspiracy theories please about me and Mooffie playing
good and bad cop trying to trick you into accepting it, lol).

Well, do _it_ (not something else) the way you'd like to
see it, and I'm sure we'll seriously consider accepting that.  

I do not care about plugins, though glad to discuss approach to them
with people who care (I'll get them in software I run too after all).

But I'm taking chance to remind that beside exciting new things
there're old basic things which has patches, etc. - and waiting for
review and progress. And I'd appreciate you consider (seriously or
"normally") *that*.

then, Mooffie's work is what we have, and I see no reason to put any
obstacle to this.  Just beacuse, oh my god, there's another bug that
we could've fixed so far but we haven't...

Again, please don't put it upside down. I *don't* use "my" issue as
excuse to not look into other things. The maintainers can also consider
not taking other issues ("which are fixed all the time") as an excuse
for not looking into that one.


Best regards,
 Paul                          mailto:pmiscml gmail com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]