RFE? Or am I wasting my time?
Bill Davidsen
davidsen at tmr.com
Mon Dec 21 21:35:50 UTC 2009
Sam Sharpe wrote:
> 2009/12/21 Alan Evans <ame.fedora at gmail.com>:
>> So I thought to file a RFE about it except:
>>
>> What component would it be against? Its location in the menu suggests
>> that it's some sort of Nautilus extension, but I can't figure what
>> package its in.
>
Now you do, but I think the real source of the problem is the GNOME project, so
I bet the best you get is RH passing through your comments, possibly with an
endorsement. Of course that's a BIG endorsement, if you can get someone to
scream at them in two part harmony.
I agree with your assessment of this as misleading.
> It's in file-roller:
>
> [sam at samlap Desktop]$ rpm -qif
> /usr/lib64/nautilus/extensions-2.0/libnautilus-fileroller.so
> Name : file-roller Relocations: (not relocatable)
> Version : 2.28.1 Vendor: Fedora Project
> Release : 2.fc12 Build Date: Fri 30 Oct
> 2009 03:38:18 GMT
> Install Date: Sat 31 Oct 2009 13:14:05 GMT Build Host:
> x86-4.fedora.phx.redhat.com
> Group : Applications/Archiving Source RPM:
> file-roller-2.28.1-2.fc12.src.rpm
> Size : 4827862 License: GPLv2+
> Signature : (none)
> Packager : Fedora Project
> URL : http://download.gnome.org/sources/file-roller/
> Summary : Tool for viewing and creating archives
> Description :
> File Roller is an application for creating and viewing archives files,
> such as tar or zip files.
>
>> Am I the only person in the world that cares? I mean, would it just be
>> a waste of time for my to file a RFE that's inevitably going to be
>> ignored or closed NOTABUG?
>
> I didn't actually notice until you pointed it out and while I don't
> actually care either way, your reasoning makes sense - which is a
> valid argument for an RFE.
>
> --
> Sam
>
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list