Daniel, thank you for your comment. But I don't see how can you portray Ahmed's behaviour as professional.
The people reporting bugs are volunteers, too. And Ahmed has frequently sucked up their time in this ticket and others by requesting tests and retests with newly churned out packages when there was no reasonable expectation that the new packages would address the issue. Quite often these new packages had basic flaws and would not even install properly, wasting even more time to correct these problems. Something is very wrong if criticizing a maintainer of a package for not upholding certain standards after being begged to do so repeatedly gets one into the "please control your temper" camp. If there were personal attacks he ignored those alright, but he equally ignored many reasonable requests to not waste the time of the people who feed him important information about what works and what doesn't. Is it too much to ask that a dev actually *asks* for feedback? Is it too much to ask that an announcement to "test after LTS release" not be ignored just merely three or four days after the release happened? I can go on and on. After about at least ten rounds (some in private chats), I'm just not prepared to jump every time that Ahmed reports success. So far, it always turned out he cut some corners and the issue was really unchanged. Sorry, but my enthusiasm to test just because Ahmed reports WFM for the nth time is pretty close to 0 by now. And just as seasoned_geek, I don't have immediate access to the machine in question, it's about 5.000 miles away now. I do still want to see this eventually fixed. But I want to see the problem fixed, not just the ticket closed. Daniel, you may be inclined to not see Ahmed at fault since he is the maintainer of the package (BTW, I co-maintain it with him, so as the one to report this he REALLY should have asked me if this is fixed). You see the effort he puts into this (and I thank him for it!). But you obviously fail to see the effort that others are putting in as well, me included. I can tell you, it's been a lot and I don't even use this machine anymore. But I *am* frustrated if time is needlessly squandered and that includes closing tickets for no other reason than "works for me" which IIRC it always did for Ahmed when he had access to a device and thus in this case is not a valid reason to close. Especially when it's not the first that the ticket was closed in error. Daniel, I have high respect for you, but I can't see how you are being objective here. -- no more /dev/ttySL0 device node https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/375148 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
