Not with the tons of configs I load and the fact that Roassal2 has been moving under my feet.
Phil On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: > > > On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:27, p...@highoctane.be wrote: > > > > Most of the feedback is "won't fix" or "done in 4.x or 5.x" > > All nice but hard to look at as day to day work is in 3.0 > > You have to move, you are missing out on all the nice stuff ! > > Seriously, I understand that you stay at what you know because things are > probably already complex enough, but really upgrading is often easier than > you think. > > > This effect will only get worse over time I guess. > > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > We have 622 open issues. There are *a lot* of old issues that nobody > will ever look at. > > Please check those that *you* submitted to see what the status is! > > > > If it is just “would be nice”, but not even on a level that you yourself > are willing to even > > send a mail to the mailing list to get people interested in helping you > to push the case > > forward, maybe you could think about closing the issue? > > > > Maybe someone asked a question? If you submit an issue and there is a > question not answered > > for a month, we should close it: How important can it be? Why should *I* > spend the time to fix > > this issue if *you* are not even willing to answer a question in a > minute? > > > > It makes no sense to have lots and lots of issues that are not important > even for the submitter. > > > > Another thing is that issues get fixed, subsystems replaced, code > removed… and the amazing thing > > is that *never* the submitter of the original report closes it, even in > these obvious cases. > > > > The issue tracker is not a one way street! > > > > Marcus > > > > > > > > >
