Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> By "we", you mean "I", don't you? And today that hasn't happened at
> least once, the reply was simply "Your bug report is about the
> installer then and thus does not belong into this bug-tracker".

Well, I knew that I was dealing with Branko, who should know
better. The response is different when innocent users hit bugzilla.

> "All the other packagers of the GIMP" make money from it, and employ
> people to do this type of thing, and have dedicated machines. Jernej
> makes binaries in his spare time, and the least we could do is show
> a little tolerance on this issue.

I am not opposed against helping Jernej with this if he asks for
help. But I don't see why he should be treated differently in the
first place.

> I don't see why bugs like these certainly don't beling in GNOME
> Bugzilla. It would be nice if you could explain why this is so
> obviously true.

Because we can't do anything about the bugs. Nobody but the packager
can. The situation would be different if the tools used to build the
binary packages would be in GNOME CVS. That would certainly qualify
the project for also using the bug tracker. But as long as people
build GIMP using proprietary scripts that they don't publish anywhere,
I am going to show no tolerance towards them.

Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to