The following reply was made to PR documentation/1393; it has been noted by 
GNATS.

From: Marc Slemko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Apache bugs database <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:  Subject: Re: documentation/1393: Laziness with NameVirtualHost documentat 
(fwd)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 09:14:33 -0700 (MST)

 I really hate people that think the world should bow to them.
 
 ---------- Forwarded message ----------
 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 00:12:40 +0000
 From: JDC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: documentation/1393: Laziness with NameVirtualHost documentat
 
 > Synopsis: Laziness with NameVirtualHost documentation
 > 
 > State-Changed-From-To: open-closed
 > State-Changed-By: marc
 > State-Changed-When: Tue Nov 11 11:22:31 PST 1997
 > State-Changed-Why:
 > The documentation changes are underway and should be completed shortly. 
 > If you can not live without them, then please use a non-beta version of
 > the software or write them yourself.
 
   This rates as the best and most unprofessional response I have ever
 received from an author of a piece of software -- commercial or free.
 I guess "rude" PRs results in "rude" replies, eh? Congrats.
 
   The bottom line is, laziness is the only thing keeping you guys from
 finishing the job; finishing the job means, writing documentation for
 something before you release it: this includes betas.
 
   The one exception is your CHANGES file: it's EXCELLENT in regards to
 being up-to-date, and on-key.
 
   However, throwing in a directive which breaks all name-based
 VirtualHosts (the NameVirtualHost directive), and not even taking the
 simple time (10 minutes at MAX) to document the feature which can
 supposedly rectify the situation is pure suicide.
 
 > Swearing at us gets you nowhere.  Rude PRs are not appreciated.
 
   Actually, this is the fastest reply I have *EVER* received from ANY
 of the Apache team. So it has gotten me somewhere as far as I'm
 concerned.
 
   And that's okay: inability to document functions which break previously
 working ones isn't appreciated either.
 
 > If you are unhappy with Apache we would much rather prefer
 > that you use something you may be happer with than that
 > you repeatedly submit rude PRs.
 
   My submissions have obviously gotten you guys riled up enough to
 pay attention to the situation, and do something about it. That's all that
 my post was intended to do.
 
   Have a nice day.
 --
 | Jeremy Chadwick                                        [EMAIL PROTECTED]     
 |
 | System/Network/Security Administrator                  [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
 | http://yoshi.parodius.com/                        "OUCH! WHAT DO YOU DO?" |
 

Reply via email to