[Bug 765248] Re: patch to add proxy support from 2.12 to 2.13

Tue Apr 19 02:23:59 UTC 2011

*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 713604 ***
    https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/713604

This appears to be a duplicate of #713604 and is the third duplicate
you've filed for that ticket.

I understand that you disagree with the upstream development team's
opinion of proxy support; nevertheless, continuing to submit duplicate
tickets is IMO not productive.

===

The remainder of this comment is perhaps not germane to the ticket, but
I take *strong* issue with your description of our discussion as your
being given "the rudest most vile treatment" and "very very very very
rude" and that you "even given the respect you think they'd give a human
being" and "man you won't believe how i was treated". I spent over 90
minutes answering your (sometimes hostile) questions and accusations,
and explaining upstream's opinion. In retrospect, I think the core issue
is that you didn't care what the answers were because you disagreed with
them.

I won't post the full 90 minutes here, but since you've claimed in
several places now how badly #transmission treated you, here is a
partial log that weeds out some of the side-topics.

03:15 < ohsix> i <3 transmission :[ just wish it had the proxy support back
03:16 <@jordan> ohsix: what it used to have isn't coming back. let the GNOME desktop handle the proxy support now

03:17 < ohsix> if it's not coming back i'll have to use something else
03:17 <@jordan> it's not coming back; sorry

03:22 <@jordan> ohsix: I appreciate your opinion, and that this may be your first time on the topic, but I've been through this many times and am personally sick of the topic and have zero desire to discuss it again. I don't want to keep beating a dead horse and have already said everything in that ticket
03:24 < ohsix> i find it completely fucking ludicrous that i have to use another client cuz of this, really; cuz otherwise theres no problem at all and it's just lovely, i daresay i like it
03:25 < ohsix> if the code that was removed needs to be completely redone to be considered for readdition, that's something else; and something i could even do

03:34 < ohsix> jordan: but once that works, what's stopping it from having private ui for only transmissions use? it's nearly all the support it needs already
03:35 <@jordan> we are going in circles
03:36 <@jordan> if you need built-in proxy support you should use deluge, or perhaps better, qbittorrent. it is not returning to transmission, as I said at the beginning of this conversation, about the same time I said I didn't want to be dragged into this conversation yet again

03:54 < ohsix> i'm willing to put the effort into making the proxy support in a form that is acceptable for it to return, it's the least i can offer for having it return at all
03:55 < ohsix> can you outline what you would need to see for it to return? you've already stated it will "never" return

03:59 < ohsix> now the question about private settings with ui, is there any wiggle room there?
04:00 <@jordan> I don't think so, no

04:09 < ohsix> i just want the missing part of the conversation, and what hard lines there are on having ui for private proxy settings, so i can think about what i can do about it to make the interested parties happy
04:09 <@jordan> so I am done discussing this. If you want to do a socks patch for the GNOME settings I'd be happy to take it, but there's no point in talking about re-adding all these settings into Transmission 

04:22 < ohsix> what technical reasons are there to object for ui for it?
04:22 < Lacrocivious> ohsix: What difference does it make? *It is not coming back.*
04:23 < ohsix> seriosuly, who are you
04:23 -!- mode/#transmission [+v Lacrocivious] by John_
04:23 <+Lacrocivious> Who are you?
04:23 < ohsix> unless you have something to add, theres no reason for you to be speaking to me

04:36 <@jordan> since most people seem to not care about proxies, or to be happy with GNOME integration, IMO that's enough
04:36 < ohsix> and like i said the global proxy settings isn't ideal but i can make do
04:39 < ohsix> as i've stated before, if it could exist in any form i am willing to do the work to make said form; don't take that as not accepting that it won't ever return to the preferences, but rather as a form may exist that is not so objectionable
04:42 <@jordan> proxies are not a feature that many people want, and of those people most of them are happy enough with GNOME doing the work
04:55 <@jordan> I hope I've clarified the dev team's reasoning a little more
04:55 <@jordan> but the all the devs will give you the same answer, builtin proxies aren't coming back
04:55 <@jordan> doesn't matter who writes  the patch
04:56 < ohsix> well if not reasoning, stated clearly and not post-hoc
04:56 <@jordan> :|
04:57 <@jordan> "well if not reasoning" ... what an ass
04:57 < ohsix> heh
04:57 < ohsix> don't read an insult into that
04:57 < ohsix> it's perfectly gentlemanly

05:05 < ohsix> even if it's never going to be readded, you can still discuss how an acceptable form might look; at least from your perspective
05:05 <@jordan> ohsix: please look for common ground, such as the socks proxy.
05:05 < ohsix> right, i said i would
05:06 < ohsix> but theres the separate concern of the private settings
05:06 <@jordan> not to me there's not, nor to the other devs

05:06 < ohsix> it's pretty stupid to ask, but can there be a hidden variable to show ui that a normal user would never see? then you disown it and say it might go away
05:07 <@jordan> then use a different client
05:07 <@jordan> and stop flogging a dead horse in-channel
05:08 < ohsix> right, but like i said; i was being romantic, the idea of changing clients over this is very silly
05:08 <@jordan> if the goal is to remove bloat, shrink the number of LOC that someone needs to maintain, and overall reduce the number of places for bugs to hide, etc etc
05:08 <@jordan> then let GNOME do it
05:08 <@jordan> the lesson is *not* to add it in a secret gui
05:09 <@jordan> that ignores *all* the goals of removing bloaty features
05:09 <@jordan> then you've got the worst of both worlds
05:17 < ohsix> i'm not ungrateful, like i said; it merely means it's an inconvienience
05:18 < ohsix> i'm trying to quantify how much ui for this, hypothetically, is acceptable
05:18 <@jordan> ohsix: please don't continue this discussion
05:19 < ohsix> i just need scrapes/announces to go through a socks proxy, and nothing else
05:19 -!- ohsix was kicked from #transmission by jordan [I asked you nicely.]

05:19 -!- ohsix [ohsix at 66.220.111.99] has joined #transmission
05:21 < ohsix> i don't think i'm being unreasonable
05:22 < ohsix> i'm not asking for flags or other things to fruit it up, and i'm willing to own the work to get it done
05:22 < ohsix> i share most of your aesthetic concerns, and the principles you've stated
05:23 < ohsix> proxy options aren't really KISS, though; it is simply unusuable by some people without it (not me, you know my use-case)
05:24 <@jordan> ohsix: please don't continue this discussion
05:24 <+Lacrocivious> ohsix: I am sure that you either believe yourself to be totally reasonable and polite and courteous in this, or that you are a well-honed troll, but you *are* being unreasonable at this point. You have been asked six ways from sunday to stop this
05:25 < ohsix> Lacrocivious: my concerns haven't been addressed, i don't know why you are talking again
05:25 <+Lacrocivious> The more important question would be, why are you still talking. Do you even realize how many times in this one discussion every single point has been repeated to you?
05:26 < ohsix> Lacrocivious: i do realize, but why are you talking
05:26 < ohsix> unless you are someone that can address my concerns kindly speak to someone else
05:27 -!- mode/#transmission [+b ohsix!*@*] by jordan
05:27 <+Lacrocivious> You have only one concern. You want Transmission to fully en-gui proxy support. You will not shut up until it has that. It will not have that. Therefore you will blather forever in circles on this same issue
05:27 -!- ohsix was kicked from #transmission by jordan [I asked you nicely twice.]

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Sponsors Team, which is a direct subscriber.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/765248

Title:
  patch to add proxy support from 2.12 to 2.13

Status in “transmission” package in Ubuntu:
  New

Bug description:
  Binary package hint: transmission

  tried contacting upstream and I got the rudest most vile treatment for
  even broaching the subject and requesting information about public
  discussion (their trac tickets on the matter invite public response,
  but they don't allow any replies through moderation)

  the attached patch reverts a change just before the 2.13 release tag,
  it was a clean removal; so it's a clean revert, i've been using the
  patch for some a while and i created a ppa with the changes,
  https://launchpad.net/~steubens/+archive/transmission-proxy-support

  i believe i've exhausted my options, my best hope is that it can be
  included in ubuntu for at least the natty time frame, and upstream
  comes to their senses by the time it's updated in ubuntu again. it is
  a major blocker for me and transmission is really the only usable
  client on ubuntu, and rightly, it's default.

  See the following for the entirety of public discussion on the issue:
  https://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/3688
  https://trac.transmissionbt.com/ticket/3817

  related bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/transmission/+bug/713604

  reverted changes:
  https://trac.transmissionbt.com/changeset/11358 (gtk client)
  https://trac.transmissionbt.com/changeset/11367 (libtransmission)
  https://trac.transmissionbt.com/changeset/11379 (qt client)