[Bug 89591] Re: Please package Amarok Rio Karma support (--with-libkarma)

[Harald Sitter]

Perry E. Metzger wrote:
- When all was said and done, a bug that shouldn't have been
- closed without a discussion remains closed. Feel proud? You certainly
- showed that asshole user that he can't push maintainers around.
-
- Not that I care. Two nights ago I got a new gift from Ubuntu -- a
- binary upgrade that makes my laptop hang the second I close the
- lid. I'd file a bug report, but none of my others have ever been
- fixed, so why would this one. I think I'll just find another OS. Two
- years of Ubuntu quality control have taught me to give up. I will not
- be trying any longer.

Lets see....

a) _anyone_ can close bugs, and _anyone_ can open them again ... from what I 
see nothing prevented you from doing the latter

b) my maintainer opinion on this is that the close was completely valid. 
Granted, the close message could have been more verbose. But generally 
speaking the request is invalid because Amaork 2 does not have support for Rio 
Karma (and to be honest, it's not in sight either). In addition to that a 
request for readding support for it would not belong in the Ubuntu bug tracker 
but http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com so leaving this request open would give no 
advantage, since someone who wants to implement a new feature for Amarok and 
is searching for ideas, will be using brainstorm and not Launchpad to find 
them.
So in the best case scenario the bug would just rot for months before either 
the Amarok team reimplements support for Rio Karma, or someone else closes it 
because it should be add to brainstorm.ubuntu.com.

c) you are blaming Jon, or rather, all Ubuntu/Kubuntu contributors that we 
didn't move our arses to get this fixed, yet you didn't do anything to do that 
"quick fix" you were talkign about, you didn't even offer your help, certainly 
someone could have at least told you what the hold up is and what to do about 
it

d) you want us to upgrade libkarma's and omfs's support level (which is 
basically what being in main means) yet you say yourself that you'd "rather 
have fewer packages that were properly maintained with care and consideration 
for the users than some mechanical figure of merit being met", so you are 
happy as long as those few packages are the ones you need? Just wondering... 
how exactly do you think this ought to work out with | 1,000 users? | 10,000 
users? | 1,000,000 users?

e) you call Lydia's "we're understaffed" an excuse, yet you have no clue about 
the size of our team, nor how much time we spend on ubuntu matters per day

f) you complain about Ubuntu breaking support for your hardware all the time, 
due to issues that were reported years ago. So... how exactly do you think 
important bugs will ever get noticed if you insist on keeping obviously 
invalid feature requests open and thus want them to fill up the bug tracker 
for no good reason?

Truth be told, I don't give a crap. Buy a mac and get all the commercial 
support you can get. If you want, use Ubuntu CDs as wallpaper replacement or 
print out our mission statement and use it as toilet paper... I simply do not 
care.

But don't you dare ranting about a committed Free/Libre Open Source Software 
contributor who spends his spare time doing the completely mind warping work 
of reading through hundreds of bug reports to find important once and get them 
resolved.

-- 
Please package Amarok Rio Karma support (--with-libkarma)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/89591
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to amarok in ubuntu.