On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 08:02:25AM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > Pierre Habouzit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 08:57:07PM +0000, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > > > Asking *kindly* some help from the submiter, once or twice a > > > [year], is not an insult. > > The insult isn't the request for help. The insult is the implication > that if there's no response, the bug will be summarily closed with no > attempt made to see if the problem reported is fixed.
This is true. However, I find more insulting the kind of mails where it is obvious that the sender has not tried the reproduction instructions given in the bug logs. I tend to answer such mails in a very irate manner (but I do answer them, and I do also do what the sender should have done - that is, try the reproduction instructions). The insult is that the sender clearly has not even read the bug logs. The situation is of course different when the sender honestly *cannot* reproduce the bug (for example, because the instructions are confusing, or the sender does not have access to the hardware required). The bug report from which this thread started is similar (but not identical). The sender should have noticed that it was a wontfix bug (this doesn't even take reading the bug log!) and not sent any mails to it as the proposed cleanup procedure is clearly not applicable to wontfix stuff (either the bug should be closed immediately or it should not be closed even with no activity, depending on the maintainer's preference). I'm grateful that people volunteer to triage bugs, but volunteering is no defense for making mistakes. -- Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho, Jyväskylä, Finland http://antti-juhani.kaijanaho.fi/newblog/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/antti-juhani/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
