On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 16:38 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 13-06-2008 15:35:25 +0100, Alan Hourihane wrote:
> > Sorry Jeremy, I realise that it's part of a patch that failed. What I
> > failed to understand is why Fabian decided to cut & paste the import
> > process and show that something failed patching did an edit on it and
> > then further went on to commit it.
> > It'd be much easier to understand if Fabian just said "o.k. done, but
> > it's untested".
> I thought maybe people are interested to know how I just do it, and
> figure out if they can do that themselves too. It helps us when someone
> can tell "I did this, and it works after that", where "this" and "that"
> are things we know (command, patch).
Well, if that's the case, it would have been nice to explain what you
were doing rather than just cut & paste and expect people to just know
I'm quite happy to learn the processes, but an explanation would have
been useful as well.
> > > Sorry that it took so long for a dev to respond to your request but
> > > this is precisely one of the reasons that I would prefer bug reports
> > > on bugzilla rather than the ML. I forget to 'fix things' that are
> > > presented on the ML and then they get buried and I won't be able to
> > > easily tell what needs to happen.
> > bugs can also get easily forgotten, and need pinging from time to time
> > to get things moving.
> Sorry, this is mainly the case for non-trivial bugs, and overflow
> situations on the active devs for this project.
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list