Ben Fowler wrote:
On 9/19/05, Alan Horkan <horkana@...44...> wrote:
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005, Nicu Buculei wrote:
... what is harder, rules for rejecting RFEs - we were polite and accepted any RFE, but to be honest, there are some requests which *never* will be implemented, like "Inkscape as Eclipse plugin"
I recommend a stock response that politely but firmly makes it clear we have limited resources, no paid developers, no one compelled to work on any features and with all due respect we thank you for feedback but must close reports which cannot reasonably be expected to implemented.
See http://wiki.inkscape.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OtherGoals ; and we should add some non-goals there and in the FAQ sheet.
IMHO there are features (such as features better implemented as extensions, features better in the Gimp ...) which should not go into Inkscape even if we had unlimited resources!
Yes, this was also my intention: give a stock response, but after that close the feature, it has no point to remain in the tracker. Is a risk because this action can upset the submitter, but this is why I think we should add a good explanation before closing.