I've filed a few bugs with the OpenSRS-SF project. Paul Sisson just deletes
them without fixing them, querying about them or resolving the problem.

#459946 I reported that certain dependant modules weren't listed in
etc/DEPENDANCIES. Paul made some obtuse comment and deleted the bug because 
evidently these Perl modules are included in his Linux (or whatever) build.

I opened a new bug pointing that that the problem was unresolved -- I built
a fresh new Solaris/x86 build and downloaded and compiled Perl 5.6.1 before
doing so, just to validate that the ncessary modules weren't there. I
reported this in the bug, and he simply deleted the bug without comment.

For fairness sake, let's assume it was a user error (not in this case)
He should attempt to validate it with the reporter, and justify his
decision. Instead, he simply ignores it because it doesn't interest him.
He also ignores someone spending 4 hours to rebuild a system just to prove
that the bug is relevant. I doubt I'll be the only one to have this problem.

OpenSRS-SF was a neat idea, but we're still wasting time with developers
who don't listen to the people who report problems. If it is only important
that the software work on his system, we're wasting our time trying to 
implement it on ours.


Also, the code is horribly badly written with code that belongs in blocks
being initialized outside of it, return()s scattered through modules rather 
than organized cleanly, etc. If getting a documentation update takes a month,
I can't imagine even trying to get real patches applied to the code base.
 
IF you can get Paul to pay attention, there is some restructuring of the
handler() routine which would make it much easier to implement hooks that
call the original routine without having to reimplement the code inside
handler() in the hook. If you really want hooks.pl to survive upgrades cleanly,
this is essential. But I'm not going to waste my time reporting it as a bug 
only to have Paul delete it without a reason.

-- 
Joe Rhett                                                      Chief Geek
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                                      ISite Services, Inc.

Reply via email to