| 1 |
2008/6/13 Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>: |
| 2 |
> In this instance, it's the "pulling teeth" to get info on a claimed known |
| 3 |
> bug from PMS folks on pkgcore, while at the same time, complaints about |
| 4 |
> the non-clarity of PMS is met with remarks (by the same group of people) |
| 5 |
> of (paraphrased) "filed a patch yet?" |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
In the case of the pkgcore bug, there was an objective statement of |
| 8 |
the fact that a bug existed, including simple instructions for |
| 9 |
reproducing it (which were dismissed by a certain person claiming he |
| 10 |
had already done so and found no bug - clearly a lie). In the case |
| 11 |
of PMS, we have vague ad-hominems - not even "complaints about the |
| 12 |
non-clarity", which in any case would be highly subjective, but just a |
| 13 |
shrill "inacceptable". |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> The problem is that this hasn't been the only case. There's a pattern. |
| 16 |
> It /frequently/ takes a day or two's worth of mails to get any decent |
| 17 |
> info out of this paludis/PMS lead, with him claiming it should be |
| 18 |
> obvious, but it's not, and while even the slightest criticism the other |
| 19 |
> way is met with filed a patch yet? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
The pkgcore was (or should have been) highly obvious to anyone who had |
| 22 |
so much glanced at the offending code. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> It's not just pkgcore either, it's two of the three current PMs having |
| 25 |
> problems, with the "One True Way" that everyone with any sense must |
| 26 |
> /surely/ see is superior (or so it seems the thought is) gets filed a bug |
| 27 |
> (or patch) yet if met with any criticism as well, from the same folks |
| 28 |
> that it's like pulling teeth from to get any info from them. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I can't even parse this sentence. |
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives