Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 10:42:58 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> To: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org>, bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/104271: devel/kdbg: fails to open core file Message-ID: <45C99112.4080201@icyb.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <200702070823.l178NWMZ038730@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <200702070823.l178NWMZ038730@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 07/02/2007 10:23 Pav Lucistnik said the following: > Synopsis: devel/kdbg: fails to open core file > > State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed > State-Changed-By: pav > State-Changed-When: Wed Feb 7 08:22:57 UTC 2007 > State-Changed-Why: > Feedback timeout (1 month) > > Once you have patches, please, file a new PR with them > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=104271 Pav, sorry if I will sound a little bit harsh, but don't you think that you are being a little bit overzealous at closing PRs in this case ? What kind of feedback did you expect ? Is a problem for which there are no patches [yet] not a problem anymore ? Doesn't mere existence of a real and acknowledged problem warrant an open PR ? Why did you take responsibility over this PR in the first place if you weren't going to submit your patches or help in anyway for this problem to be [really] resolved ? I can confirm that the problem still exists and I insist that this PR be re-opened. Only if for avoiding duplicate PRs and increasing a chance that somebody (not necessarily the maintainer or me) will look into this. Apologies again for being emotional, but that's how I feel about this kind of attitude towards PRs. I do appreciate everything else you do for FreeBSD and for the ports including herculean task of PR management. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45C99112.4080201>