|
Jóhann, I do not think you are participating in this discussion with your mind open to the possibility that you may be wrong. People have offered many reasons why they think what you are proposing is a bad idea. You have failed to acknowledge the possibility that any of those arguments might be valid; in fact, you have completely ignored many of them. In contrast, you may have noticed that the people who disagree with your proposal have still acknowledged that some of what you have said is true. It's a sure sign that someone is not listening with an open mind when they ignore anything in the discussion that weakens their thesis. Furthermore, numerous things you've asserted here have been proved objectively false, and you've failed to acknowledge a single one of those, choosing instead to change the subject each time. Changing the subject rather than admitting error is another sure sign of an idealogue. I am no longer active enough in this community to know whether you hold some sort of position of authority, whereby you will be the one actually making the decision about whether to stop putting Fedora bugs in RHBZ. If you do, then frankly your conduct throughout this discussion has given me no faith whatsoever that the decision will be made in a rational, objective way. Rather, it feels to me like you've already made up your mind and are just putting on a show of listening to other people's opinions before going ahead and doing what you wanted to do all along. On 09/24/2013 04:35 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: There is nothing in the current system to stop the person reporting a Fedora bug from choosing to report it upstream instead of, or in addition to, reporting it to Fedora. Indeed, I myself often do that when I believe that a bug I've encountered is not Fedora-specific, and I'm sure many other power users and developers do so as well. What you seem to be ignoring (see above about your complete failure to acknowledge or respond to arguments to which you have no good answer) is that people who are willing and able to do the work of reporting bugs upstream are an extremely small minority of the people who actually report Fedora bugs. Many people here are telling you that if we make end users report bugs upstream, most end users will simply stop reporting bugs. You can't make this fact disappear by pretending it does not exist. In other words... with the current system, power users can report bugs upstream when appropriate, while normal users can report bugs in one place, to Fedora RHBZ, and in the case of a properly maintained package, the package maintainer(s) will do the right thing with it. In the system you're proposing, power users must ALWAYS report bugs upstream, which means that (a) some of them won't bother and (b) there won't be any place for them to report Fedora-specific bugs, and most normal users, frankly, won't bother to report bugs at all if they have to jump through hoops to do so. The system you are proposing is a net loss. or give the upstream maintainer ( if he's the middle man ) more time to work on the bug discuss and pass it's patch through upstream ( which needs to be done in most cases anyway ).I'm really not sure what you mean by this. In particular, I don't understand how and when the "upstream maintainer" of a package is the "middle man", nor why that would "need to be done in most cases." Frankly, the more you write in this thread, the more convinced I become that you are just saying anything you need to say to avoid having to admit that you're wrong about anything. I make it a rule not to attempt to hold a rational discussion with someone who I don't believe is being rational. Therefore, I'm done with this discussion. Regards, jik |
-- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
