[PD] sourceforge tracker (was: Re: Get list of a the arguments of a patch without using any external?)
IOhannes m zmoelnig
zmoelnig at iem.at
Wed Mar 9 10:39:19 CET 2011
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 2011-03-08 20:16, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>> On 2011-03-08 09:47, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Mar 2011, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
>>>> iirc, this was discussed on the pd-dev list prior to enabling the
>>> Is reading pd-dev a requirement for people who submit to the
>>> patchtracker ?
>> i don't think so. however, if people complain that there posts are not
>> processed in the way they imagine that they should, they might want to
>> familiarize themselves with the way others imagine it.
> How does that not mean "I think so" ?
you don't have to know that issues in the tracker are forwarded to
pd-dev, in order to submit issues.
if you are using the tracker to send emails to pd-dev without having to
be subscribed, then you are obviously trying to tweak rules of pd-dev.
if you try to tweak the rules, then you should probably know them.
> How would anyone find out about the rule, other than reading a few years
> of pd-dev until stumbling upon that thread ; or writing a mail that will
> be interpreted as being a "complaint" simply because "report" and
> "inquiry" aren't in the vocabulary ?
why do you insist in having explicit knowledge about the rules?
i keep submitting bugs and patches to other projects at sourceforge, and
i couldn't care less whether these tickets are automatically forwarded
to some email address or not.
i don't know the tracker rules of these projects. but i see that there
_is_ a tracker, and hope that someone will eventually read it (when they
(i find that trackers that contain 5 or less items are usually worthless
(except for very young projects), as they seem to be not used at all but
have been created automatically and nobody turned them off; with
projects that have many issues, and many of them closed, i usually
assume that the tracker is in active use and eventually somebody
responsible will have a look at my issue)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3636 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the Pd-list