Jeremy Pereira wrote:
> On Mar 3, 2006, at 19:36, Geoffrey Alan Washburn wrote:
>
>> Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>> On Mar 3, 2006, at 16:34, Mike Conley wrote:
>>>> I agree completely, and it's a shame. Anyone else who agrees should
>>>> go an add votes to #707; I have no idea if they ever get paid any
>>>> attention, but I don't imagine it can hurt.
>>> The developers have previously stated that they do not pay attention
>>> to votes.
>>
>> It seems kind of unfortunate that the developers maintain this attitude.
>> What exactly do they pay attention to?
>
> As they are, for the most part, volunteers I think they pay attention to
> the things they find interesting.
So basically you're saying the developers don't find making their
software usable interesting? That is interesting in of itself.
> If you don't like it, perhaps you could ask for your money back :-)
Yawn. When are people going to learn that saying that makes you look
silly. I'd, and probably a number of more serious users, would gladly
pay someone to improve a number of problems in Subversion that the
developers "don't seem to find interesting", but I don't see any
developers lining up.
>> Would they even accept a patch if someone went off and implemented this?
>
> Provided it meets the subversion quality standards.
> Read the HACKING file in the source distribution.
Clearly you haven't looked at this in a while, because it says to look
at http://subversion.tigris.org/hacking.html. This document is very
vague as to the process by which a patch is actually accepted. As far
as it describes, submitting a patch is no more likely to make the
developers accept it than voting will make them pay attention to an
outstanding issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sun Mar 5 19:45:36 2006