Steve Schaeffer wrote:
Let us review...
I submitted this bug report 18 months ago and you said you'd have a look at
it.
I *had* a look at that problem some time ago, and tried a few hours to
fix it - when I remember correct I dropped my test because of a
completely wrong approach.
Almost 3 months ago I pointed you to the source of the problem, as I see it.
I guess you're right on the cause.
I finally have some time to dig into it myself and provide a patch that
*does* fix the issue to my satisfaction, and yes I did test it, again to my
satisfaction, and all you can do is make snide comments?
Well, I'm sorry if my comments annoyed you - but getting a patch that
doesn't work (and it didn't worked after a very simple test with a few
packets) is just annoying to me as well.
Just clicked on a few packets, applied a display filter and all history
entries were gone.
If you don't like what I've submitted then why not expand on what I've done
to *your* satisfaction?
I don't understand you here.
You might want to take a look at just how it is you encourage input to an
open source project.
Well, in the long run having a patch that doesn't work won't motivate me
to look at patches from other people as well.
The question about attaching your patch to the bug report was serious, I
don't see a good reason to have a bug report but doing most
communication without it. Bugzilla is intended for such purposes, so
while your patch might not work for me, some one else (including me or
yourself) may have a look at it later to get a final fix.
Regards, ULFL
