Doug Newgard writes: > On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 15:26:59 -0800 > Kyle Terrien <kyleterrien@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 01/02/2016 02:50 PM, Doug Newgard wrote: >> > On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 15:35:01 -0700 >> > Leonid Isaev <leonid.isaev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> >> On Sat, Jan 02, 2016 at 02:06:05PM -0800, Kyle Terrien wrote: >> >>> Thank you! I was tempted to reopen it, but it looks like the general >> >>> consensus is that an AUR package will be submitted. >> >> >> >> You can only request to reopen... >> > >> > And that request would be denied unless you can bring new info to the table. So >> > far, I haven't seen any. >> >> The new info I have is that Mozilla is creating a walled garden. There >> is no way to override it besides rebuilding Firefox. > > That's not new info, that's the same argument that was already rejected. The issue in question ([1]) was raised before release 43, where signature checking, AFAIU was turned on by default but could be manually disabled. The new info would be that for release 44, signature checking would not only be turned on by default but there would be no way to disable it. Do not confuse "no new info" with "there is new info, but that doesn't change our decision." The larger, and very philosophical question is "How user un-friendly can upstream make it before Arch decides to *not* package as upstream intends?" (Answering this requires keeping in mind that Arch users are unlikely to fall squarely into the target group of upstream.) /M [1]: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/45900 -- Magnus Therning OpenPGP: 0x927912051716CE39 email: magnus@xxxxxxxxxxxx jabber: magnus@xxxxxxxxxxxx twitter: magthe http://therning.org/magnus Unix is the answer, but only if you phrase the question very carefully. -- Unknown
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
