Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

Journal of LTjake (4001)

Tuesday May 27, 2008
06:36 AM

5 more down

[ #36527 ]

Catalyst 5.7014 is out the door. Hopefully that will stop the flood of questions about a "strange uri_for() behavior." With that done, I've taken out 5 more RT tickets.

Two extremely old wishlist items were rejected (RT #26758, RT #24132). This is basically due to the fact that they were over a year old, and really should be talked about on the dev list if they are still inclined to have them resolved.

A couple others required that I cook up a test or two to ensure the patch was applying was satisfactory (naturally, we would always hope to have a test submitted along side the patch): RT #26455, RT #34437.

The last ticket seems to have been related to a regression in 5.7013, as the ticket author claims the latest release fixed the issue. Closed! (RT #35994)

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Why do you even bother with RT when you're just going to reject the bugs because the reporter doesn't want to subscribe to your dev mailing list?

    Why don't you just set RT to forward reports to the mailing list and save us both a lot of time?
    • If it's an @perl.org mailing list, then don't even think of having RT mail forwarded to that. It isn't accepted by the perl.org MTA. I found that out first-hand.
    • Hi Chris,

      I'm sensing some frustration in your post. Let me see if I can give you some perspective from where I'm coming from.

      For the large part RT has been ignored by the Catalyst developers. The reasons are two fold:

      1) Only a select number of people have access to the RT queue.

      2) The currency for development discussion has been the mailing list(s).

      The majority of bug reports and feature requests up to this point have been handled on the catalyst and catalyst-dev mailing lists. As a Catalyst "core" members,
      • You're right, it wasn't fair of me to generalize so much. When I searched rt.cpan.org more carefully I saw that the number of outright rejections was smaller than I recollected.

        As maintainer (or co-maintainer) of many packages, I'm aware of how much time it takes to field bug reports and feature requests. That time is why I can't afford join the mail list of every project to which I contribute bugs (179 rt.cpan.org tickets over 6 years, with 6 rejections).

        With Perl::Critic, we usually add feature requests