Re: [Gajim-devel] Fwd: UPDATE: net/gajim to 0.12 and drop maintainership

[Jonathan Schleifer]

Am 21.12.2008 um 12:36 schrieb Yann Leboulanger:

I think you should read ticket, and test 0.12 branch. There is a missing

import so sending file is just not possible.

Hm, maybe they're using trunk then. I'll have a look.

And please, stop saying that only a few people are affected by this and

only those with a slow connection, because it's just not true. I got

to me, and all I could tell them was that it's not my fault and I was
against relasing it like that.

people with 16 MBit connection in my roster who get disconnected all the time etc. And half of those who updated to 0.12 have already complained

I say that because I got just 0 complaint for this problem except from

always in front of my computer), and because svn is tested by a lot of
users and none complain since it's implemented (11 monthes).
I'm not saying we should not improve that, just that more people use
filetransfer (already 3 tickets open for that in 2 days)

you, no ticket, nothing in private mail, nothing in room (though I'm not

That's strange, as it was even discussed in the MUC and reported there. You were even highlighted, IIRC. And I got lots of complaints in query, even in a social network in the Gajim group were a lot of them and I had to explain how to disable keepalives and all said it works much more stable since they disabled it. If you like, I could forward you some. Many users don't seem to use the bug tracker, but complain to developers. When you tell them "File a ticket", you usually get only a "later" for an answer.

My goal is not to have as much user as possible, but to have as much
happy user as possible, and fixing filetransfer will make them more

cannot release before it's fixed".

happy than if I say : "no no wait some weeks, we have another bug and we

--
Jonathan

If my proposed fix doesn't work, we can still release a 0.12.1 without a fix for the timeout. But first, I think we should try the proposed fix. PS: Could we have a Reply-To:? I was used to just always add gajim-devel@gajim.org to the To: as it's never there, but as you saw lately, that can cause quite some confusion (private mail answered publically because of that habit etc.)

PGP.sig
Description: Signierter Teil der Nachricht

_______________________________________________
Gajim-devel mailing list
Gajim-devel@gajim.org
http://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel