On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 03:25:37PM +0530, Noorul Islam K M wrote:
> I thought if the patch was incorrect, I might be getting some feedback.
Sorry, sometimes things just fall through the cracks :(
Please don't take this as something personal.
Communications can be delayed or simply get lost since we're working
in a distributed team in very different timezones, rather than in the
same office where it's usually enough to get up and talk to the person
at another table in the same room.
It's not easy to learn how to effectively communicate and get attention
via email, but that's what we all have to do. And we also have to learn
to tolerate occasional miscommunication.
> > Discussion on irc showed that we couldn't just apply the patch without the
> > additional work from Stefan as that would open a window where somebody could
> > look at otherwise hidden files. (I assumed he would apply your patch after
> > that, but later I just applied the change anyway)
I wasn't aware of the patch proposed in this thread and how it
related to the change I made. I replied to one of Daniel's questions I
saw in this thread, and doing so inspired me to take a look at the code
myself, but that was it.
Maybe having more than just an issue number in the subject would help
prevent this sort of thing? Our focus is usually on problems, not numbers.
So the subject could have hinted at what problem was being solved.
The numbers don't carry any information on their own in email.
They only make sense if people are browsing the issue tracker, find that
particular issue, and then go to the mailing list to see if something
was written about this issue (and that is a good thing, and it's why
we try to include the numbers if possible). But they don't help in other
cases, e.g. someone just catching up with dev@ email. Unless people are
bothered enough to look them up in the web interface (which I'm often not).
Received on 2011-06-23 13:03:48 CEST