Bug#117166: acknowledged by developer
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Christian Perrier wrote: PS: using rude language does not help, imho. It even more deserves the content of the ideas you try to support. This is one of the golden rules of human communication: if your first words are aggressive towards people you're talking to, your ideas have a great chance to be ignored. Well, I mostly agree, and sorry for that. My first words were an executive summary of how I felt after seeing a bug of mine being closed with almost no action on the part of the maintainer, but I agree that feelings have no place in the BTS. The bug we're talking about seems related to a very specific setup of your own. [...] No, I don't think it was so specific. It was the standard way for a samba printing account to be available system-wide as an ordinary printer using /etc/printcap. I'm not going to reopen this bug as I admit (considering its age and the fact that samba code was suffering a lot of changes at the time of submitting) it is likely to be fixed, and I know how to reopen a bug or submit a new one. My complain, so to speak, is about the way this particular bug has been handled since it was first reported, and what exactly do we mean by moreinfo. The bug didn't need moreinfo when it was first reported. I did my homework, and provided everything a normal maintainer could need to reproduce it, but even in such case I was asked for moreinfo. Can you understand at least why the word lazy came to my mind, even if I did the wrong thing by explicitly spelling it in written? Thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#117166: acknowledged by developer
I'm not going to reopen this bug as I admit (considering its age and the fact that samba code was suffering a lot of changes at the time of submitting) it is likely to be fixed, and I know how to reopen a bug or submit a new one. My complain, so to speak, is about the way this particular bug has been handled since it was first reported, and what exactly do we mean by moreinfo. The bug didn't need moreinfo when it was first reported. I did my homework, and provided everything a normal maintainer could need to reproduce it, but even in such case I was asked for moreinfo. Can you understand at least why the word lazy came to my mind, even if I did the wrong thing by explicitly spelling it in written? Yep, I understand and your explanations are appreciated. We use the moreinfo tag at least during this intensive bug triage period for samba packages, to track down issues where we have requested bug submitters about old bugs still existing or not. So, we're on a bit of misunderstanding in general which is perfectly solved by this small mail exchange. Thanks for taking care answering again and, of course, feel free to report any other new bugs: we'll try to make you the promise they won't stay ignored next time..:-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#117166: acknowledged by developer
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Christian Perrier wrote: Yep, I understand and your explanations are appreciated. We use the moreinfo tag at least during this intensive bug triage period for samba packages, to track down issues where we have requested bug submitters about old bugs still existing or not. So, we're on a bit of misunderstanding in general which is perfectly solved by this small mail exchange. Thanks for taking care answering again and, of course, feel free to report any other new bugs: we'll try to make you the promise they won't stay ignored next time..:-) Thank you. For the record, and going back to the original bug report, I was using this: [...] ) | $smbclient $server\\$service $password -U $user -P $logfile but I see that option -P is currently not documented, and the manpage in potato suggests that it's a deprecated option, so I can understand that smbclient would not work in such case. My current setup does work, so this bug is really obsolete and it is ok to have it closed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#117166: acknowledged by developer
Christian Perrier wrote: All these bugs are very probably away for a long time. We requested more input from bug submitter but got none. Hence closing them... Hmm, you are a lazy maintainer. Compare (a) and (b) below: (a) The user does not give enough information to reproduce the bug, the bug is not reproducible, or both. In this case, I agree, lack of user input is a reason to close the bug. (b) The user provides plenty of details about how to reproduce a bug, and the bug is reproducible. The maintainer is silent for several years about the bug. After a few years, maintainer asks can you still reproduce the bug?, as if it were impossible for him to reproduce the bug by himself. One month later, lack of user input is used as a poor excuse to close the bug. Do you see a difference between (a) and (b) or am I the only one to see it? If you see a difference, please do not close bugs so gratuitously in the future. Thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#117166: acknowledged by developer
Quoting Santiago Vila ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Christian Perrier wrote: All these bugs are very probably away for a long time. We requested more input from bug submitter but got none. Hence closing them... Hmm, you are a lazy maintainer. Compare (a) and (b) below: Well, you're free of having such opinion. We requested for some input to a user who I perfectly know is still an active developer in the project. We got nothing, no answer at all. The bug we're talking about seems related to a very specific setup of your own. At least one minimal answer with hmm, no time no answer right now, please don't close would have been enough for us to keep the bug opened. If you see a difference, please do not close bugs so gratuitously in the future. I agree this may be a controversial issue and I leave other maintainers of the package, especially Steve whose advice is usually the Wise Advice we sometimes need, the decision to keep this bug closed or not. You also have this choice as bug submitter, by reopening it. In fact, closing it was an efficient way to trigger a reaction, it seems. I personnally won't play BTS war: if you reopen the bug, it won't be closed again. PS: using rude language does not help, imho. It even more deserves the content of the ideas you try to support. This is one of the golden rules of human communication: if your first words are aggressive towards people you're talking to, your ideas have a great chance to be ignored. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
