Well, an acknowledgment would demonstrate that the bug tracker is still actually active, given that this month-old bug is the most recent one on our tracker and still untouched. It would also demonstrate that the developers are aware that the bug exists and have a plan for how and/or when it would be fixed, and perhaps show that the developers are grateful for the contribution.
On the bug tracker I'm active on (KiCad), we always try to respond to and triage bug reports as they come, for good reason. Occasionally that doesn't happen, because we get inundated with reports, but avr-libc only had two reports that _month_ so I don't think that's much of an excuse. The bug tracker is a way for developers to communicate with users. It's generally considered rude to give the silent treatment to people who communicate with you. (For reference, I am "anonymous". Savannah screwed up my login and I couldn't be arsed to figure out why.) On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 03:44:46PM +0200, Joerg Wunsch wrote: > As anonymous wrote: > > > ...anyone? A month to have a simple "definitions missing from headers" > > report > > even acknowledged is silly. > > What would an acknowledgment get you, actually? > > I tend to work down that kind of bugs right before a release. > -- > cheers, Joerg .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL > > http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ > Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) _______________________________________________ AVR-libc-dev mailing list AVR-libc-dev@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
