Yeah, I poked originally. See: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156017#c3 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156017#c5 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=156017#c6
Other people commented and submitted further patches after that. After that, I just gave up. If you're looking for more volunteers, have a good think about this. Just recently another bug has been marked as a duplicate of this one. I get the feeling if I just continue to ping the bug, or the list, people would tell me to pull my head in because it's not scratching their itch or whatever. I only brought it up in the context of someone else saying there are issues getting patches reviewed and applied. Regarding IRC - I've never used it because it doesn't save history, so I have to keep an IRC client open 24/7 just to see people's responses - and the people I'm waiting on are invariably in a different timezone. If you have a viable product, submitting a bug to their bug tracking systems and pinging a couple of times should be sufficient - and I note what's been said above regarding there only being 1 full-time developer on the product. Redirecting people to IRC doesn't make less work for anyone - it makes more. Anyway, I did email the gtk-devel-list - from memory - though admittedly it was 13 years ago, as you mentioned. > Otherwise, you get exactly what you paid for. Oh, I had that one coming. Thankyou. Dan On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Emmanuele Bassi <eba...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 17 December 2017 at 23:14, Daniel Kasak <d.j.kasak...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Just one example, gtk3 (yes 3, not even 4) is currently completely > >> unusable on > >> Mac, so I sent a patch to fix this: > >> > >> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=791174 > >> > >> I know my patch is suboptimal, but to make this clear: it does not > address > >> a > >> minor bug, this bug is a real show stopper on Mac, and this change is > >> purely > >> gtk internal. Of course it is not a clean solution, but there is no > reason > >> to > >> simply apply this patch (at a bare minimum at least to the gtk3/stable > >> branch) > >> with a FIXME comment for now so that people on Mac can finally start > using > >> gtk3 > >> at all. > > > > > > I really have to agree. One of my bugs I raised in 2004 - which involves > > data loss - is still open. I submitted a patch ( which was difficult at > the > > time - I only dabble in C when I absolutely have to ) which received very > > little feedback, and the bug has rotted since. > > Yes, everyone has their own pet bug where they submitted a patch and > waited for feedback, as if GTK doesn't have ~3000 issues open at any > given time, and a constant stream of bugmail. > > It would be *great* if we could review all incoming patches; sadly, we > either do that, or we spend time actually developing the toolkit. > > Plus, if you have a patch lying in bugzilla for *13* years and you > never bothered to actually poke people about it, then I don't think > it'll ever get bumped up in terms of priority on the list of things to > do. > > > "Send a patch" only goes so far. If patches don't get reviewed, or don't > get > > sufficient feedback, and never get accepted, what's the point in sending > > patches? > > Your role doesn't terminate at sending a patch. > > It's your bug, your patch, and your responsibility for bringing it up > to the people *volunteering* to work on GTK. If you have a patch that > is languishing in Bugzilla, join the #gtk+ IRC channel on > irc.gnome.org, or send an email to gtk-devel-list. > > Otherwise, you get exactly what you paid for. > > Ciao, > Emmanuele. > > -- > https://www.bassi.io > [@] ebassi [@gmail.com] >
_______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
