On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 4:02 AM, Christopher Forsythe <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 6:37 AM, Felipe Contreras > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 3) The plug-in is not only under-maintained, but also badly maintained >> >> I plotted some bug statistics[3] and the results are crystal clear: >> msn-pecan has fixed 78% of the valid bugs reported, while Pidgin only >> 37%. > > This said, these are just numbers. If 200 people file the same bug and all > of them are already resolved so the tickets are closed, that boosts the > numbers. etc etc
That's an unfounded claim. If 200 people file the same bug it will be marked as duplicate, considered invalid, and out of the calculation. > So, how is msn-pecan actually better, and worth the pain of introducing new > bugs and implementing the protocol? At the end of the day what matters is the code you are running and I wrote the bulk of both code-bases. If you don't want to believe that the author of two pieces of code is telling you that one is better than the other, then I don't think you are listening. > Also, on another topic. You have had some very obvious personal issues with > the pidgin/libpurple team. Their opinion is that you are hard to work with. > Later on down the road if the Adium team uses the plugin you have worked on, > is this what the team has to look forward to? How do you handle things when > people take a while to review patches, or do not like your patch? I contribute to projects such as git, linux kernel, gstreamer, telepathy, and others[1]. Pidgin is the only project where I just cannot work, and I've heard people say the same thing, like the Instantbird maintainer. Perhaps the problem is not me, but Pidgin. [1] https://www.ohloh.net/accounts/felipec/positions -- Felipe Contreras
