FS#2649 - [network/utils] nftables bump version 0.9.3

[openwrt-bot]

n8v8R:

dot release 0.9.3, change log attached

[[https://netfilter.org/news.html#2019-12-02-d]]
[[https://netfilter.org/projects/nftables/downloads.html#nftables-0.9.3]]

To build the code, libnftnl 1.1.4 and libmnl >= 1.0.3 are required

[openwrt-bot]

n8v8R:

The task type is set to Feature Request and not Bug... Thus why you are closing it with such reasoning?

[openwrt-bot]

n8v8R:

Dear Petr Štetiar (ynezz)

Reason for denial:
It's bug tracker, for issues/bugs, not for feature requests.

The Task Type drop down provides:

• Bug Report
• Feature Request
• Build Failure

How does that jibe with the reason for denial?

And if this is not the correct place then where else to lodge feature requests? Or such a frowned up and rather unwanted?

[openwrt-bot]

n8v8R:

A refined search currently shows 80 open tasks of type Feature Request - so why this one but permit 80 others?

[openwrt-bot]

ynezz:

And if this is not the correct place then where else to lodge feature requests?

I would try forum.openwrt.org, asking politely someone to create patch or pull request which is the right thing to do anyway.

Or such a frowned up and rather unwanted?

What is better for you? Get immediate feedback, that nobody is going to look at this feature request, so you can continue with your effort by other means (forum, IRC etc.). Or would you rather prefer, that we ignore your request, let it open as the other 80 feature requests and make it possibly linger it here without any reaction forever?

A refined search currently shows 80 open tasks of type Feature Request - so why this one but permit 80 others?

And if you look closely, you'll find out, that some of them are open there for years without any reaction.

[openwrt-bot]

n8v8R:

I would try forum.openwrt.org, asking politely someone to create patch or pull request which is the right thing to do anyway

For the packages outside the base repo it is possible to lodge a feature request (open an issue) but not for the base repo mirrored on Github.

Would you not concur that a Task Type = Feature Request inspires/invites to open exactly such Task Type? Which then seems somewhat misleading, seeing the reasoning for closing such Task Type.

The forum appears to me as a place where users help users and did not strike me as a place to lodge a feature request - which is somewhat uncommon considering other forums and platforms where source code is being hosted.

In short it is irritating that:

• part of the source is hosted on Github and an issue can be opened
• other part of the source is mirrored at Github but no issue can be opened
• Flyspray features Task Type = Feature Request but that is not to be used
• feature request for the mirrored code portion to be lodged in the forum instead

Opened a RFI for the base repo in the forum on the subject.

https://forum.openwrt.org/t/rfi-base-repo-appropriate-place-for-feature-request-and-what-qualifies-as-feature-request/51674

What is better for you? Get immediate feedback, that nobody is going to look at this feature request, so you can continue with your effort by other means (forum, IRC etc.).

Instant feedback is just fine, but not being advised where else to take the matter did not help.

Or would you rather prefer, that we ignore your request, let it open as the other 80 feature requests and make it possibly linger it here without any reaction forever?
And if you look closely, you'll find out, that some of them are open there for years without any reaction.

Perhaps about one's perspective/prerogative on task management, always been wondering about tasks that are stale for years and never been attended to, let alone closed