On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 09/30/2011 01:29 PM, todd rme wrote: >> >> I don't think any of those are good options, since all of them have >> the same result: spamming developers with huge amounts of useless >> information. This would only make it far more difficult to manage bug >> reports. Just being patient seems like the only solution that could >> work in practice on a large scale. > > Inquiring about the state of a piece of work which a person is responsible > for is not "huge amounts of useless information". If some of these bugs are > patiently left unaddressed then we end up where we are right now: with bugs > left open for years, with the whole bug report process being left broken and > with users wasting their time filing bug reports which will never be > addressed. How is this a better way of handling things?
If they don't have time to respond to all the bug reports, what makes you think they would have time to respond to just as many, if not more, emails? You would only be increasing the amount of stuff they need to read, further decreasing the amount of time they have to respond to bugs, not to mention fix them. In the end you would end up with the same situation: tons of emails left unanswered. -Todd >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
