----- Original Message -----
From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Dec 26, 10:00 PM
> I really don't see any point in delaying this release further to fix NNTP.
Are you sure ? Read my estimates. Is there a delay ?
I am factoring in some time to allow the responsible developer to fix
the regression if he wants to. I could trim that time if you think the
estimates are high or there is no point in waiting.
> If that protocol is still broken, I would just as soon remove it from the
> distribution until someone has time to do it properly.
>
> Personally, I don't use NNTP with James, so I can't verify your
unspecified
> claims at this time, but if they are correct, let's just take NNTP out
until
> it can pass a protocol compliance test.
>
> ..
>
> I proposed removing it before now, so if it still isn't
> working right, let's just move the thing to proposals/
-1.
Reason:
1. You are not the only user. There are others who have used NNTP
2. This has worked in the past, so it should be possible to rollback
regressions
3. I have offered to fix it in a reasonable time frame if the
person who has broken NNTP cannot take this responsibility. From my
previous email. 'My estimate is new year or latest first week of
January if I start after a couple of days.' Is that not good enough ?
4. Is a proposal/vote needed to fix regressions ? Regressions esp as
serious as rendering a chunk of functionality useless should be fixed
NNTP is broken, what is the advantage in disabling this feature over
me fixing it ? I personally find arguing about fixing regressions or not
tiresome.
This does not encourage participation or validate or improve work already
done
on James.
Please feel free convince me otherwise. As you may remember I can
change my mind and agree with you. :-)
>
> What specifically ARE the problems?
Register NNTP Server in your client. See if you can send and see any
messages in NNTP Reader. I have used Outlook Express 6.0. This is not
a subtle bug by any measure.
> Basically your message, by your own
> admission, is a rehashing of old wounds without telling us what bugs you
> think are present in the current code.
No it is not, it is documenting a certain irresponsibility on the part
of a developer who has caused number of regressions and has not done
any testing. There have been at least 2 regressions that(one that I
sent a fix for) that renders NNTP Server completly useless. Even after
all this there are still regressions. At some point I got put off and
stopped testing the changes the developer had made. Recently I started
testing again as we were getting close to release.
I expect that anyone doing surgery on a protocol would at least do a
simple test rather than throw it over the fence. This is not being
done. This is an expected courtesy and I am would like it
maintained. Making mistakes is ok, but the number of regressions don't
indicate careless mistakes to me. It is my hope this is corrected.
Don't read between lines and don't get into old stories (there is no
end to that and I have other things to think about) - I am stating the
NNTP SERVER IS NOT WORKING NOW and it was working earlier. So
RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPER SHOULD FIX THIS OR LET ME. I don't know how to
put it more clearly so I hope this is good enough.
>
> If there are some defects, there have been MONTHS for someone to work on
> NNTP. No one did.
Are you sure ? There was one open bug in bugzilla. It was not
reproduced by me(the author of nntp part). I had got positive feedback
from users. In 2.1 there have been number of changes and in previous
email I have given estimates and those are NOT IN MONTHS.
>
> As for your name, we've already agreed that ALL author tags will be
removed
> from the code.
Yes good point. There was a barb thrown some time back that I was
blocking. 'author' was in context of a desire to state that I don't care
who does this as long as it works. I realize now that it was
inappropriate thing to say this - "I don't care how nntp is fixed but
I would like it fixed. For all I care, fix NNTP(whoever has broken it)
and remove my name from author tag." Sorry about that. A bit
distracting ay..
Harmeet
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
