Last minute Nautilus change for Fedora 9

[Jeff Spaleta]

On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Mark <markg85 at gmail.com> wrote:
>  And putting it upstream is something that i tried before and am not
>  gonna attempt again (not anytime soon).. they seem to have a reason to
>  keep it on 96x96 so let them have it.

>
>  A bugzilla report (posted here earlier) has been made and it's now all
>  in the hand of that maintainer. Want me to raise the severity of the
>  rapport from low to medium or high?

Here's a little secret..setting a severity higher as the reporter
doesn't mean a maintainer will agree that your issue is of significant
severity to be bumped up in the priority list.  Don't get your
feathers ruffled if noone responds any faster if you set the severity
to high.  It's not a crasher or dataloss issue, so don't expect anyone
to put this sort of issue ahead of things like that.  I personally
would consider setting this to a high severity as an abuse of bugzilla
reporting, and if you did it to a bug against one of my packages I'd
pretty much instantly make a point of remembering that I need to
re-calibrate any high severity reports from you as low severity... but
that's just me.

There is a desktop list..specifically for discussion of desktop issues
that require discussion.
I think you jumped the gun a little bit by calling for a vote before
making the effort to discuss this on the desktop-list.

Calling for votes like this before an appropriate discussion in the
appropriate location (desktop-list in this case, if the maintainer
doesn't respond in a timely manner..give it a week).. reeks of an
effort to abuse governance structures to force the introduction of pet
features. And I have a big problem with that, and I make absolutely no
excuses for coming down hard on people who do it... because it needs
to be done to discourage a tidal wave of other people from doing it
for their pet features and bogging down structures like fesco with
wasting time on this sort of stuff.


-jef