[RFI - base repo] appropriate place for feature request and what qualifies as feature request

With packages in the base repository it is not possible to lodge a feature request (open an issue) at the Github mirror. And for Flyspray received an advisory citing:

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

Despite when filtering the search in Flyspray by Task Type = Feature Request it returns a count of 80 such open task types as of now [1]

Thus, begging the question where to lodge a feature request then?
Plus, what qualifies as bug and what as feature request?

For instance:

  • missing package build configuration - bug or feature?
  • package source version bump with fixes a/o new features - bug or feature?

[1] https://bugs.openwrt.org/index.php?string=&project=2&do=index&advancedsearch=on&search_name=&type[]=2&sev[]=&pri[]=&due[]=&reported[]=&cat[]=&status[]=open&percent[]=&opened=&dev=&closed=&duedatefrom=&duedateto=&changedfrom=&changedto=&openedfrom=&openedto=&closedfrom=&closedto=

1 Like

Despite when filtering the search in Flyspray by Task Type = Feature Request it returns a count of 80 such open task types as of now

Just guessing, probably nobody has cared to closed them?

Plus, what qualifies as bug and what as feature request?

From https://openwrt.org/bugs

In case you are unsure if what you found is a bug, or if you have other issues that are not bugs, please use the forum, IRC or mailing list.

With packages in the base repository it is not possible to lodge a feature request (open an issue) at the Github mirror.

Right it's just a mirror + place for pull requests, so if you have other issues that are not bugs, please use the forum, IRC or mailing list.

1 Like

That clarifies the place but it does nothing about

So either way, being unsure whether it is a bug or being sure that is not a bug, one should first initiate communication via forum, IRC or mailing list?

You may not like this:

  • but one way to do so is include of all it's code in a PR
  • mail the developers and ask them to do so (I believe you've heard this before, as you mentioned this in another thread; but it wasn't for a package developed by OpenWrt)

And I would call this a feature request - it included the word "features." I'm just hoping you're not making multiple posts, simply out of frustration.

If I understand this correctly, it's obviously a bug, if true; and I would think the buildbot would contain a faillog for the package already (or be absent).

Since you've seen a quote from the Wiki, don't you think it would be easier to just tell us all these bugs and desired features now (via threads for each individual issue), instead of continually asking what and where?

If you won't list them, why does it matter if it's a bug or feature request?

You now know this is one of the official places to ask. The IRC is #openwrt on FreeNode. The mailing list link can be found on the Wiki.

Really - you do know the the person who opens the bug report sets the Task Type, correct?

You couldn't possibly hold the developers responsible for that. Just because something is enabled doesn't mean it's used for a functional purpose. For example:

  • there's a Wiki system here, but (almost) usually when that term is used here, it refers to the main openwrt.org site
  • also, another one, the Flyspray voting system has no effect on the addressing of bugs - there are humans (called Developers) who choose to do so
  • this site has a badge system, it holds no functional purpose

(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)

  • So you got your clarification, can you just list them all now?
  • Or do you want us to guess too?
  • Is this a hypothetical, or is this one of your "bugs"?
  • This makes no sense, I think you're trolling here, or you really need more skill to try making such requests
  • I wouldn't count that as a bug whatsoever
  • Just enable it (it's not our fault you don't know how - but feel free to ask)
  • If you haven't tested it, how do you know it works - word of mouth?
    • Have you asked them if they tested it?
  • If I understand, this seems simple as a PR to change a N to a Y
    • Have you even searched if these requests had already been made (you can search GitHub you know)
  • And again; not OpenWrt-related - why are you mentioning the Kernel developers?
    • Are you attempting for relevance by noting a config file?

Nope, haven't noticed, hence my remark. I still have 0 clue what you're trying to get fixed/updated. And that's why it seems you're just posting out of some frustration. Also, given your profile is hidden, such cannot be easily referenced.


I see 2 threads in the last week you're possibly referring to. Noting the titles as [bug] or [feature request] respectively, could make that more clear.

  • Since I take you to be telling the truth, and I assume you want everyone to be aware - please provide the link(s) (on this thread) to the previously created threads nothing the bug request for this kernel config change; and the other bugs/feature requests you reference?

That's about right. You're not paying for it. There's no corporate team that works for you or gets paid to do this. You won't even make a simple list? You don't wish to IRC or email? You were told how, and you refuse, or want something else? (I'll put question marks, so you don't say I assumed something again)

True, this is why I'm wondering why you're engaging in this. That also caused me to think, are you even capable of testing if someone is willing to do these things for you; if not, how does anyone know it works? More importantly, how would you even know such a fix worked!?!?

I'm actually following this because I realized you wanted something and may be unable to test it - if you actually got it. I was gonna volunteer (if able). :heart:

...but I still don't know what you want.

I'm using context clues, taught in kindergarten. You said "new version," not "the $%^& is broken." So I said a PR with the new code. You then noted again that you don't have the skill.

Because I'm trying to find your logic in noting that you see any number of Feature Requests. If you know the developers don't toggle that flag on opening of a ticket, what sense does it make to tell us they exist?

  • No one said stop using Flyspray (this is why I think this is just a troll)
  • Are you trying to ask/force the developers to honor the flag?
  • Are you mad they choose not to consider it greatly?
  • Does it hurt your feelings that you used that particular option and too much time has elapsed for you?
  • Do you want it removed?

It just seems like trolling to me - making a big fuss about something, while now knowing it's unrelated to actual functions, processes or fixes.

I would think people with accounts voting for something to be fixed en masse would be relevant - but it seems only your bugs and features should be addressed with some form of priority? Classic selfishness it seems, I'm just glad that the OpenWrt developers don't play into this kind of behavior.

Well, a list containing this would be nice:

Facts: I read very carefully over and over above, there's no link to whatsoever to a single Flyspray ticket you're referring to. To the contrary, I saw this:

So don't you think it's more respectful of me or anyone else trying to help - to provide this list, including whatever bug, whatever non-hypothetical, the URLs, etc. - before you tell me I had an opinion about it?

Perhaps just slow down a little, and place everything in a list on one post - for easy reading.

Where is this link!?!?

No, I said produce the list, respectfully, Mr. Truthful Man; because you seem upset or trolling now for sure.

Saying how to make features and bug requests, while not showing/listing/linking them.

  • I'm lost, are you reading another thread other than "[RFI - base repo] appropriate place for feature request and what qualifies as feature request"?
  • Does this mean you don't have a list?

The first point noted you - making no sense about your Flyspray comments. You are the OP, hence the list is directly related. The others were regarding why you noted the flag in your OP. Again, directly related.


It's obvious you're trying to at least troll some of my phrases; and you didn't wanna answer the question. It's obvious to anyone reading reading that I stated the voting system is in the same disuse as you make the Feature Request flag to be. Simple.

I honestly wanna know, because I don't get why you're so upset at me.

I'm curious, if you think I was insulting you...what search term should I have used?

  • Are you Petr Štetiar?
  • Am I supposed to guess he's the developer of whatever you're talking about?

This is why I said maybe you need to relax and just note them all.

Notwithstanding, I apologize for upsetting you; but I honestly have no clue how I was supposed to have searched Flyspray, with what search term and why.


The two Flyspray tickets posted by @anon45274024 were:

I'm confused why the OP deleted the post once providing the list.

If it's just a patch, I can test the nftables one, I need to read up on it.

That what's what was asked of you; but OK. Thanks for flash posting it. The tickets can be referenced now - that's all that matters.

OK man, cool, whatever. Thought you said it was flagged a bug (above). Now I see the link though. Thanks for the links.

I also marked the massively deleted posts for Vandalism. I thought it was just the links at first.

Correct. The "Feature request" choice is a Flyspray system default which nobody bothered to remove, I disabled it now to avoid future confusion.

Ideally ask on the mailing list. Feature requests in the bug tracker usually will not be acted upon at all. They'll just sit there, get stale and push down more important bug tickets.

Of course there's not clear-cut distinction but usually you can classify it like this:
A bug is a regression in established functionality while a feature request is the wish for someone to implement a new piece of functionality or to update a component for the sake of newer features without the update fixing either security issues or established functionalities.

To judge two specific examples:

  • Lacking nftables sets support in the kernel is a bug since it breaks the expected operation of packaged nftables and since it apparently was enabled and worked at some point in the past
  • Bumping nftables was classified as feature request since it is an optional package and the task cited neither security issues nor broken features justifying such a version bump

If the version bump would fix a regression or a security vulnerability, updating it would be part of the required maintenance work. If a version bump does neither, but potentially introduces more features, it is an additional burden distracting from work on bugs or potentially introducing regressions or changes in behavior without any immediate need.

In the case of bumping nftables, the ticket did not mention any reason on why inftables should get bumped or whether the currently shipped version is broken, so it was treated as a feature request.

In general any kind of feature request (even simple ones such as seemingly minor package updates) requires a sponsor in the end - a developer willing to implement it. Among the developers there is very little to no interest to implement most feature requests made in the bug tracker so such requests are usually rejected when noticed, or simply ignored.

Providing patches and a more extensive reasoning on why a package should be updated / a feature should be introduced can help to nudge developers towards simply implementing the desired change, but it is not a guarantee that this will happen.

The general (informal) consent so far seems to be that the bug tracker should only track regressions in existing functionality.


Actually, sir, when I was a n00b here - people accused me of massively changing posts,up to an including altering the original meaning of the thread. So I try to refrain from that practice, and instead strikethrough or note edits at the end of a post.

I believe I'm sticking to:

"appropriate place for feature request and what qualifies as feature request"

  • Thanks for the links.
  • I appreciated that topic; before you deleted it.

I sincerely apologize if you disagree and believe it was a derailing.

I am already subscribed to a bunch of mailing lists and not a big fan of it, because:

  • prone to abuse by spammers
  • it is not possible to subscribe selectively to a particular thread but being forced to receive all communications on the list
  • difficult to search | filter archives for a particular topic
  • impossible to pick up on a previously topic exchange if not been subscribed at the time the topic been discussed or having previously deleted the topic from the inbox of the email client

But that is just my impression and only a potential sideline of this thread since it touches the subject of the location.

For that purpose I did attach the release notes, which cites various fixes of existing functionality, with the ticket but otherwise not explicitly pointing to the fixes, expecting that the release notes would be looked into instead - seems a wrong assumption.
Since nft is neither the default userland to manage nf nor probably otherwise widely deployed by users it understandably may not matter much but for a user who actual deploys nft it does.

This topic was automatically closed 10 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.