Fwd: Question about maintenance of ROX-Filer

Thomas Leonard <[email protected]> Sat, 10 Apr 2010 16:09:20 +0100
Newsgroups gmane.comp.desktop.rox.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
[ Just found this in my spam folder (which I normally don't check at
all). It was sent directly to me, so forwarding it to the list. The
bug in question has been fixed. Please send correspondence about
ROX-Filer to the list. ]


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Barry Kauler <[email protected]>
Date: 7 April 2010 14:26
Subject: Question about maintenance of ROX-Filer
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]



Message body follows:

Thomas,
I think that ROX-Filer was originally your baby, I was
wondering if you still have any input to its maintenance.

I'm the founder and lead developer of Puppy Linux, and
ROX-Filer has been our central file and desktop manager for
years.

We found a serious focus bug when moving up to GTK 2.18,
which forced me to stay with 2.16.6. I reported the bug in
November 2009, got no response until today, the bug was
closed with the comment that it is "intentional behaviour".
I was astounded.

It's a bug that renders ROX-Filer virtually unusable, as
many other have also found. Some found a fix, that they got
from an Ubuntu forum I think, and one of our guys showed how
to patch the Rox code to fix it.

I posted a link to this fix on the bug-reporter, but your
guy 'kerofin' just ignored it and closed the bug.

I'm just astounded. The bug I originally reported is:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=107023&aid=2889906&group_id=7023

Someone else posted about the same bug, got the same
response and it was closed:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2925212&group_id=7023&atid=107023

I have opened another bug report:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2983200&group_id=7023&atid=107023

This is my forum thread with the fix:
http://bkhome.org/blog/?viewDetailed=01389

It would be great if the developers will recognise that the
behaviour is not "intentional" and is a bad bug. The fix is
there, waiting to be applied.

Regards,
Barry Kauler
http://bkhome.org/blog/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev