librsvg2 unmaintained?

Michael Schwendt mschwendt at
Mon Feb 21 21:18:09 UTC 2011

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 10:14:16 -0800, Adam wrote:

> On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 19:47 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > In bugzilla 553069 many of the dupes are false positives due to ABRT
> > running wild with non-working detection of duplicates.
> For the tenth time, this is a really unhelpful way of looking at things.
> "Detecting duplicates" is not some sort of simple, 'digital' operation
> which either works or doesn't; it's a hugely complicated, much more
> 'analog' area. You can't say abrt has 'working' or 'non-working'
> detection of duplicates. It detects some - quite a lot, actually - and
> misses others. The abrt devs are always working to make it detect more.
> If you see a case where it misses duplicates, the correct thing to do is
> not passively-aggressively whine about it on a mailing list, but contact
> the abrt developers to report it, with data.

Check your attitude! It is way too hostile. I don't see that you add
anything helpful here at all. I'm not whining passively-aggressively.
I've sent a notification to abrt-owner a few days ago, and not only
have I mentioned the false positive dupes, I've also communicated with
the bug reporters to have their fresh backtraces to the ticket manually.
Several of the wrong dupes I've looked up in bugzilla and posted the
correct bug numbers. While at it, I've even closed several real dupes
of the >600 open "nautilus" tickets.

More information about the devel mailing list