Hello Denys,

Monday, February 16, 2009, 6:38:55 PM, you wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Pavel Tsekov <ptse...@gmx.net> wrote:
>> Hello Denys,
>> Monday, February 16, 2009, 3:15:45 PM, you wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Pavel Tsekov <ptse...@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>> You might not be aware but I am (still) one of the two official MC
>>>> maintainers.
>>> De jure, maybe you are. De facto, the project is an orphan.
>>> How many more times do I need to submit my patches
>>> to get your attention?
>> If I am not mistaken most of your patches were incomplete  and you
>> wouldn't bother to fix them.

> Oh really. I just checked.

> http://mlblog.osdir.com/gnome.apps.mc.general/2004-10/index.shtml

This was far before I became a maintainer.... not that it does matter

> http://www.mail-archive.com/mc-devel@gnome.org/msg05103.html

As you can see from the discussion I was the one who commited the
patch. Again ... this was before my time as maintainer (not that

> 24/10/2004 - I posted the patch for the 1st time
> sometime later - I added it to bug database as well
> 07/11/2005 - patch was rediscovered and an active discussion started
> (which means there was more than one reply per year)
> 12/08/2006 - patch got applied

> By this time, of course, I didn't track the fate of the patch.

> THREE YEARS for a teensy patch like this???!!

So you want to bitch... I really cannot help you with that. If enough
people complained that you patch wasn't included in the tree I guess
it would have been included. By the way I didn't realize that it was
such important feature anyway. It would be nice if you submitted a
whole patch which of course would mean that you'd have to deal with
the configuration dialog, etc.

> http://mlblog.osdir.com/gnome.apps.mc.general/2004-10/txt4mW4MB9qlO.txt

> You are glacial.

> Another patch, which I posted more than once, and this one
> is not applied:

> http://www.mail-archive.com/mc-devel@gnome.org/msg05526.html

> You didn't even have any objections. You just dropped the ball.

I made an observation and you failed to follow up. Obviously I must
have red the patch and the code since I made that observation. I spent
some of my time on it but you wouldn't care to explain why the patch
is necessary. Sorry - it doesn't work like that.

> You know, I have more interesting things to do in this life
> than spending three more years getting it applied.
> Especially that it is a bit bigger, who knows, maybe
> I'm being optimistic about three years here...

Sorry, it takes more than submitting a patch to a list to get it
applied. If you don't want to do you part its up to you. Many people
fail to understand that.

Best regards,
Pavel Tsekov

Mc-devel mailing list

Reply via email to