On 08/02/2013 02:31 PM, inode0 wrote:
Not every bug will be fixed. If that isn't your expectation then you
really should adjust your expectations. If some number of cases of
what you perceive to be wasted effort outweighs those cases where bugs
are fixed and millions of people benefit because of
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
> On 2 August 2013 19:09, inode0 wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
>>> On 02.08.2013, inode0 wrote:
>>>
Failure to have your expectations met leads to demotivation and the
easiest way to fix that is to change
On 2 August 2013 19:09, inode0 wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
>> On 02.08.2013, inode0 wrote:
>>
>>> Failure to have your expectations met leads to demotivation and the
>>> easiest way to fix that is to change your expectations.
>>
>> It's free software, and therefor
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> On 02.08.2013, inode0 wrote:
>
>> Failure to have your expectations met leads to demotivation and the
>> easiest way to fix that is to change your expectations.
>
> It's free software, and therefore I'm not expecting that people find the
> time
On 02.08.2013, inode0 wrote:
> Failure to have your expectations met leads to demotivation and the
> easiest way to fix that is to change your expectations.
It's free software, and therefore I'm not expecting that people find the
time to fix my bug. In 99% of all cases, the bug is reported elsew
Tim:
>> But it's kind of hard to believe that all the bugs a person might have
>> reported can't be fixed within the same release. As the original
>> responder suggested, why bother making reports...
Tom Horsley:
> Because sometimes they become a source of great amusement like
> this one:
>
> ht
On 2 August 2013 14:55, inode0 wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
>> On 02.08.2013, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>>
>>> While one could consider not answering a bugreport to be a display of
>>> bad manners
>>
>> It first and foremost is demotivating, which in turn results in fe
Am 01.08.2013 22:31, schrieb Tethys:
> So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
> came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
> several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
> the package maintainer. I wonder why I bother
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Heinz Diehl wrote:
> On 02.08.2013, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>
>> While one could consider not answering a bugreport to be a display of
>> bad manners
>
> It first and foremost is demotivating, which in turn results in fewer
> bug reports, which in turn results in wor
On Fri, 2 Aug 2013 15:00:16 +0200 Heinz Diehl wrote:
> On 02.08.2013, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
>
> > While one could consider not answering a bugreport to be a display of
> > bad manners
>
> It first and foremost is demotivating, which in turn results in fewer
> bug reports, which in turn result
On 02.08.2013, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> While one could consider not answering a bugreport to be a display of
> bad manners
It first and foremost is demotivating, which in turn results in fewer
bug reports, which in turn results in worse software..
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproje
On Fri, 02 Aug 2013 16:16:21 +0930
Tim wrote:
> But it's kind of hard to believe that all the bugs a person might have
> reported can't be fixed within the same release. As the original
> responder suggested, why bother making reports...
Because sometimes they become a source of great amusement
Allegedly, on or about 01 August 2013, Marko Vojinovic sent:
> Speaking hypothetically (and playing the devil's advocate a bit), the
> fact that the bugreports were not responded to doesn't mean that they
> were not looked at or maybe reported upstream. It can happen that the
> upstream devs alread
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 2:07 PM, David wrote:
> Are they still active 'in' Fedora 18 or fedora 19? If yes then reenter them.
Please don't create new bugs just because old ones were closed; it
makes things messier. If you open a new one every time a Fedora
release goes EOL it's much harder to tell
On 08/02/13 06:54, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/01/2013 03:38 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> Yep I just got 3 closures of bugs reported in F17 that were looked at
>> and subsequently fixed in F18 but not back ported. I know there will be
>> several other when F18 reaches EOL since the next version of
On 08/01/2013 04:02 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Atleast for me, I just noticed a few bug reports being closed that I
had taken a look at earlier, decided that I will focus on other bugs
since it was a low priority issue and the danger of introducing new
problems were higher. Should I have respond
Hi
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/01/2013 03:38 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>
>> Yep I just got 3 closures of bugs reported in F17 that were looked
>> at and subsequently fixed in F18 but not back ported. I know there will be
>> several other when F18 reaches EOL since
On 08/01/2013 03:38 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
Yep I just got 3 closures of bugs reported in F17 that were looked at and
subsequently fixed in F18 but not back ported. I know there will be several
other when F18 reaches EOL since the next version of LibreOffice fixed some and
F18 will remain
On 08/01/2013 03:25 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
While one could consider not answering a bugreport to be a display of
bad manners, David is right that you should check if the bug is
resolved in the later versions of Fedora before getting angry about
being ignored.
Actually, I've had a few that g
On 08/02/13 06:25, Marko Vojinovic wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 14:25:30 -0700
> Joe Zeff wrote:
>> On 08/01/2013 02:07 PM, David wrote:
>>> On 8/1/2013 4:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when
F17 came out and now they're being closed as F
On Thu, 01 Aug 2013 14:25:30 -0700
Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 08/01/2013 02:07 PM, David wrote:
> > On 8/1/2013 4:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
> >> So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when
> >> F17 came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once
> >> again, several of them don
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
> So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
> came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
> several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
> the package maintainer. I wonder why I
On 08/01/2013 02:07 PM, David wrote:
On 8/1/2013 4:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
the package mainta
On 8/1/2013 4:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
> So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
> came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
> several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
> the package maintainer. I wonder why I bother some
On 08/01/2013 01:31 PM, Tethys wrote:
So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
the package maintainer. I wonder why I bother sometim
So here I am, sat with an inbox full of bugs that I reported when F17
came out and now they're being closed as F17 is EOL. Once again,
several of them don't appear to have even been looked over *at all* by
the package maintainer. I wonder why I bother sometimes...
Tet
--
"Java is a DSL for takin
26 matches
Mail list logo
