Jeff Morriss
changed
bug 9625
Comment # 5
on bug 9625
from Jeff Morriss
Funny, over the years I've made a lot of fixes to a lot of protocols that I
don't know the first thing about. But it does require a detailed bug
description maybe with links to the specification to show why the bug
description is right or what needs to be done.
By writing a bug in such a way that only someone deeply familiar with BACnet
can fix you've greatly decreased the chances of someone _ever_ fixing the bug.
I would guess--based on a brief review of the commit logs--that none of the
Wireshark core developers (which do a large portion of the bug fixing) know
much about BACnet. Anish is the only person who has submitted
non-infrastructure-related changes to the BACnet dissectors in the past 2 years
and I wouldn't be surprised if he's no longer interested in helping resolve
this bug (remember we all do this in our spare time; it's great that Anish--who
isn't a core developer and thus has even less "responsibility" to fix
bugs--showed some interest in the first place).
(In reply to nuabaranda from comment #4)
> Fixing that bug without proper practical knowledge of BACnet and the
> standard document at hand won't be possible.
>
> (In reply to Pascal Quantin from comment #3)
> > Keep in mind that not everybody knows BACNet
> > protocol, so a detzilled description of the issue increase the chances to
> > get a fix.
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.