From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ivan Shmakov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: debbugs.gnu.org: is it user-centric or developer-centric? Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:27:28 +0000 Message-ID: <87sihf2dpb.fsf@violet.siamics.net> References: <87mwcmb8nx.fsf@violet.siamics.net> <87r3wz7h0e.fsf@violet.siamics.net> <87bno33uli.fsf_-_@violet.siamics.net> <9y4r7vx74.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416425283 977 80.91.229.3 (19 Nov 2014 19:28:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:28:03 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 19 20:27:59 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XrAux-0006nu-UG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 20:27:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60332 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XrAux-00019D-HK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:27:55 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57982) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XrAul-000198-M1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:27:44 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XrAuh-0001YY-OK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:27:43 -0500 Original-Received: from fely.am-1.org ([2a01:4f8:d15:1b86::2]:47659) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XrAuh-0001Y6-Gf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:27:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=siamics.net; s=a2013295; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:Sender:References:Subject:To:From; bh=VGPMUdKXZwHnYCtAvh7aKqvdNbl+LUVDOq25XsdMINQ=; b=cbkEpiYcIDxVwxjK8q0d+h7e1JlIA5f7gHu+VD2tHbBLloYt6xgdGPaSJN/bLF7lOCUsyj/SaHAjwuZSlnfXuz3lPrAKrz1kT/bMGPZ5SCEl7Uz2HwzcNi8bsoBaxVaLQ7fQ4Qlz5G5w2SsvYioK7dAmP4XDP/SM4+V5Q9lz/5k=; Original-Received: from [2a02:2560:6d4:26ca::1:1d] (helo=violet.siamics.net) by fely.am-1.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XrAue-0006mt-Jm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 19:27:37 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=violet.siamics.net) by violet.siamics.net with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XrAuX-00073j-6N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 02:27:29 +0700 In-Reply-To: <9y4r7vx74.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (Glenn Morris's message of "Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:53:35 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a01:4f8:d15:1b86::2 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:177807 Archived-At: >>>>> Glenn Morris writes: >>>>> Ivan Shmakov wrote: >> Specifically, per my prior experience with the Debian BTS, the >> issues which the developers do not consider worth fixing, but which >> are otherwise valid, are tagged 'wontfix', but /not/ closed. > https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00779.html > [...] if the bug isn't open to discussion, I close it. I think > that's fairly common across Debian. If it's tagged wontfix but still > open, that generally means one of two things: either it's still open > for discussion, but the maintainers are indicating their current > thinking on it, or it's a commonly-reported false positive (from the > maintainer's perspective) and they're leaving it open so that people > will see it in the bug list and see that someone else already > reported it. > Seems like a good summary to me. I do not seem to understand the =E2=80=9Cisn=E2=80=99t open to discussion= =E2=80=9D part. Is it something along the lines of =E2=80=9CI have decided, and my decision is final=E2=80=9D? > We have 1000s of bugs. Closing ones that are never going to go > anywhere is essential. FWIW, #19109 already provides a trivial workaround for the issue, and I could just as well add one I personally use to #17959. My primary concern is that following the closure, the bugs will become less visible, making it more difficult for the users having preferences similar to mine to find these workarounds. My intent is to devise a proper fix for #17959 eventually. As for #19109, we seem to have a fundamental disagreement on whether Emacs should or should not be allowed to pop a buffer at some random time, possibly interfering with whatever the user does at the moment. --=20 FSF associate member #7257 np. Mourning Star =E2=80=94 Kamelot =E2=80=A6 3= 013 B6A0 230E 334A