| 1 |
On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 22:09 -0400, Travis Tilley wrote: |
| 2 |
> if by bugged you mean versions that work? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
I think you mean 'versions that run with known bugs' ? Still bugged I'm |
| 5 |
afraid. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> > I find it ironic that you who are so keen on pointing out that something |
| 8 |
> > was broken in x86 gnome and obviously knew about it all this time, |
| 9 |
> > failed to inform us during that period. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> there was an open bug report. would you have liked us to file duplicates? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
It wasn't open all the time & no i was talking about 'mailing' or maybe |
| 14 |
poking on IRC. Note that I myself was unavailable during this period. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Besides the bug in question got fixed in a day, so before that point |
| 17 |
there's still an unexplained gap ? And you obviously knew about it, |
| 18 |
because you already had marked it stable... |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> > I'd appreciate it if you guys stopped distorting the facts to |
| 21 |
> > consolidate your own QA-hurting policy of moving beyond the maintainers |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> who are you to talk about QA hurting? just take a look at: |
| 24 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24439 |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> you even have the portage devs screaming at you there. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
A nice misinterpretation, once again you try to play it on the person & |
| 29 |
on a totally unrelated example, while I even told you thats sort of a |
| 30 |
weak way to go about arguing your case (you don't have much else i |
| 31 |
guess). Maybe if you read it objectively, you would would be able to |
| 32 |
give a fair judgement, but i guess thats way beyond you. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Basically what you are saying here comes down to this : "Judge, they |
| 35 |
steal too, so I should be allowed to steal as well.." I don't think that |
| 36 |
holds up anywhere. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Anyway, were open to changes there, unlike some devs here. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
> well i'm pretty sure i shouldnt be taking QA advice from the gnome team. |
| 41 |
> that and the bug i mention is quite an interesting read. i'd say my case |
| 42 |
> for not paying attention to a single word you say would indeed be quite |
| 43 |
> strong. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Again on the person, you really don't have any objective, sound |
| 46 |
arguments do you ? |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Well I'd say that it doesn't really matter, because in the end it is not |
| 49 |
your decision and I know most devs are more objective than you in this |
| 50 |
matter. I actually do not think I can convince you of anything because |
| 51 |
you are so stuck up in your own way of thinking. Thats exactly what this |
| 52 |
is about, because if you would be reasonable then this wouldn't be an |
| 53 |
issue in the first place. You are afraid of losing some of the freedom |
| 54 |
you enjoy now and won't trade it for better QA, it's very human to hang |
| 55 |
on to every scrap of imagined power you got. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
- foser |
Archives