[Nut-upsdev] Re: [nut-Patches][304310] IP v6 support

[Arjen de Korte]

>> I (maybe wrongly) assumed that 'patches' are 'bugreports-with-patch' and
>> fix something that is broken. Following that reasoning, it should be a
>> 'feature request', since there is nothing to be patched (yet). We never
>> said that NUT supports IPv6, so its not broken.
> that's maybe where we disagree: for me, the patch tracker is both for
> bugfixes and new features. But we might duplicate it with an entry in
> the feature, point the patch...

For me, it's a matter of which activities should receive priority:

1) bugreports with patch (if someone took the time to investigate what's
wrong and provides a solution, they should receive the highest priority)

2) bugreports without patch (we should first fix existing bugs, before
introducing new ones) :-)

3) feature requests (with or without patch)

> More generally, if we have a patch, either for a new feature or a
> bugfix, a part of the job has been done, and that makes the difference
> with the feature and bug trackers.

http://www.allwords.com/query.php?SearchType=0&Keyword=patch

9. computing.
      A set of instructions added to a program to correct an error.

In my opinion a feature request is not a patch and also should not be
treated with the same priority as a 'real' patch. I find it very confusing
to see these two separate categories listed under the same tab.

Best regards, Arjen