#9530: Improve/fix readline workarounds for Arch Linux and openSuSE
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Reporter: baechler | Owner: GeorgSWeber
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.6
Component: build | Keywords: Arch Linux SuSE readline
Author: | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: | Merged:
Work_issues: |
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
Comment(by leif):
Replying to [comment:18 TheBlackCat]:
> Replying to [comment:16 leif]:
> > Unfortunately, the ticket hadn't been set to "needs review", there are
apparently only a few Sage ''developers'' dealing with OpenSuSE,
>
> That indicates that something is wrong with the patch handling process.
If somebody provides a patch, the status should be changed from "new" to
"needs review" (by the author / the one that uploaded a patch).
> It is one thing if developers do not fix a problem because they cannot
reproduce it. But the patch was available and just sat here. Further, it
is a patch for a "major" issue.
"major" is the default priority. It should perhaps have been at least
critical. Also, the title doesn't suggest higher importance (it's
"improve...", which doesn't sound like fixing a major bug).
> Shouldn't such patches receive particular attention from developers?
It's more likely that people search for tickets e.g. needing review, or
"new" ones that are marked "crtitical" or "blocker".
> > and there hasn't been activity on the ticket for a while.
>
> Yes, that is exactly the problem. Why did did it take this long for
such a simple patch for a major issue to receive any attention? If I
hadn't posted the comment, how long would it have taken for developers to
act on it?
See above. Posting just "ping" on the ticket also causes attention by
those people involved (owner, reporter, cc'ed people and everyone who
commented on a ticket, at least if they have e-mail notification enabled,
which should be the case for most, if not all).
Also, I haven't seen recent build [failure] reports regarding OpenSuSE and
that issue on sage-release, which is another way to bring back attention.
Florent's post on sage-release (and incidentally? Dave's activity on
#9530) brought me back to this.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9530#comment:19>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
