5 ms·

No actually, jbk is being honest and realistic. The cost to fix the bug is currently too great for them to devote resources to fixing it correctly, so s/he is

by sah2ed 9y ago

No actually, jbk is being honest and realistic. The cost to fix the bug is currently too great for them to devote resources to fixing it correctly, so s/he is merely trying to economize scarce resources here. This is an open source project we are talking about here, not a paid product. If the gp thinks they have time on their hands, then by all means, the project will gladly accept patches.

dane-pgp 9y ago
jbk was not being honest or realistic, though. The gp was not volunteering, and jbk is not waiting for their patch. It's fine to say "We don't have the resources to fix this", but jbk's sarcastic remark is not the best way to convey this. Of course, jbk is welcome to phrase their comments however they want, but I don't think that the way they chose was the most effective way to invite patches (and the gp presumably already knew that a valid patch would be accepted).
- sah2ed 9y ago
  I think you and I mostly agree but I will try to address the possible source of your disagreement with his phrasing. @jbk's original phrasing was: I'm waiting for your patch. I'm very happy for your volunteering. You probably think his first sentence is sarcasm but it is not for two reasons: 1. He followed it up with a gentler "I'm very happy for your volunteering." 2. I've been online long enough to know that his phrasing is a bit odd, a hint that the commenter is likely not a native speaker. For a bit more context regarding #2, my suspicion is not unfounded. I remember the @jbk nickname from this highly upvoted post [0] last year, where he did something in the interest of the VLC project that a lot of people would find incredibly difficult to do under similar circumstances. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15372048 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15372048
  - jancsika 9y ago
    > 1. He followed it up with a gentler "I'm very happy for your volunteering." "Gentler" seems like a euphemism to me. I read it instead as passive aggression which is generally considered rude and not a productive way of communicating with people. Normal communication: 1. X makes an unreasonable demand of developer Y. "Users expect Z, you devs should always do Z." 2. Developer Y counters X's unreasonable demand with simple-to-follow reasoning: "I understand where you are coming from, but there are important technical reasons why we cannot do Z. Unless you have the time to dive into the code to understand those technical details (and perhaps even become a developer yourself in the process), you're just going to have to trust us on this point." Benefits: clarity, positive example, trollproof. Costs: several sentences, restraint. Passive Aggressive Communication: 1. X makes an unreasonable demand of developer Y. "Users expect Z, you devs should always do Z." 2. Developer Y tries to "teach" X not to make unreasonable demands by making a similarly unreasonable demand. If devs should always do Z, and if current devs are too busy to do Z, then it should be so obvious that X must become a dev that Y will imply it in the response: "Thanks for volunteering!" Benefit: brevity Cost: confusion, consequent anger/humiliation in X that makes it harder for them to learn the ostensible lesson, troll food, negative example for future devs to follow, scary to potential devs, etc. Edit: typo
coldtea 9y ago
>No actually, jbk is being honest and realistic. Nope, he was being sarcastic. What he essentially said is: "We put in the actual work, so we can put out whatever crap, and you either chime in, or put up with it". Which would be good, if they didn't also promote their project as good to people.
- Shikadi 9y ago
  Actually, he wasn't being sarcastic. I see how you may have thought that, but his response was genuine, and the commenter took it as so.

by sah2ed 9y ago

dane-pgp 9y ago

jbk was not being honest or realistic, though. The gp was not volunteering, and jbk is not waiting for their patch. It's fine to say "We don't have the resources to fix this", but jbk's sarcastic remark is not the best way to convey this. Of course, jbk is welcome to phrase their comments however they want, but I don't think that the way they chose was the most effective way to invite patches (and the gp presumably already knew that a valid patch would be accepted).

sah2ed 9y ago
I think you and I mostly agree but I will try to address the possible source of your disagreement with his phrasing. @jbk's original phrasing was: I'm waiting for your patch. I'm very happy for your volunteering. You probably think his first sentence is sarcasm but it is not for two reasons: 1. He followed it up with a gentler "I'm very happy for your volunteering." 2. I've been online long enough to know that his phrasing is a bit odd, a hint that the commenter is likely not a native speaker. For a bit more context regarding #2, my suspicion is not unfounded. I remember the @jbk nickname from this highly upvoted post [0] last year, where he did something in the interest of the VLC project that a lot of people would find incredibly difficult to do under similar circumstances. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15372048 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15372048
- jancsika 9y ago
  > 1. He followed it up with a gentler "I'm very happy for your volunteering." "Gentler" seems like a euphemism to me. I read it instead as passive aggression which is generally considered rude and not a productive way of communicating with people. Normal communication: 1. X makes an unreasonable demand of developer Y. "Users expect Z, you devs should always do Z." 2. Developer Y counters X's unreasonable demand with simple-to-follow reasoning: "I understand where you are coming from, but there are important technical reasons why we cannot do Z. Unless you have the time to dive into the code to understand those technical details (and perhaps even become a developer yourself in the process), you're just going to have to trust us on this point." Benefits: clarity, positive example, trollproof. Costs: several sentences, restraint. Passive Aggressive Communication: 1. X makes an unreasonable demand of developer Y. "Users expect Z, you devs should always do Z." 2. Developer Y tries to "teach" X not to make unreasonable demands by making a similarly unreasonable demand. If devs should always do Z, and if current devs are too busy to do Z, then it should be so obvious that X must become a dev that Y will imply it in the response: "Thanks for volunteering!" Benefit: brevity Cost: confusion, consequent anger/humiliation in X that makes it harder for them to learn the ostensible lesson, troll food, negative example for future devs to follow, scary to potential devs, etc. Edit: typo

coldtea 9y ago

>No actually, jbk is being honest and realistic. Nope, he was being sarcastic. What he essentially said is: "We put in the actual work, so we can put out whatever crap, and you either chime in, or put up with it". Which would be good, if they didn't also promote their project as good to people.

Shikadi 9y ago
Actually, he wasn't being sarcastic. I see how you may have thought that, but his response was genuine, and the commenter took it as so.