https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=342015
--- Comment #4 from kavol <ka...@seznam.cz> --- (In reply to Laurent Montel from comment #3) ... > Baloo developper has created this patch. > So it was required and there is never optional so no it's not a bug. > Perhaps you need a feature but it's not a bug because never supported. ahem, sorry, but I still do not follow ... there is a discrepancy between the statement and the actual code so one of them is wrong - "buggy" and as the statement is part of a broader discussion, not just a random thought, I'd say the bug is in the code and not in the statement it's not a feature in the sense of "new functionality", it is a problem with already existing code so probably reassigning this to the actual author of the code to make it compliant with what he says the code should do would be better than just closing the bugreport with something like "he coded it this way so it should be so" - if I get your words right (if not, I apologise; also, I don't know much about processes in this bugzilla instance, if the assignee is tied to the component and cannot be changed or whatever ... I just present my POV which doesn't have to be best due to missing context) > So I will look at for kf5 cool, thanks > but not for 4.14. I will not break all for it. > If you don't want it. remove akonadi_baloo_indexer. ok, I guess I can live with that as long as `rm /usr/bin/baloo*` doesn't break anything I use ... > I don't know why it reported it as optional but it's not my problem. > If you want to open a bug report about it, report to kdelibs ok, bug 342477 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. _______________________________________________ Kdepim-bugs mailing list Kdepim-bugs@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kdepim-bugs