On 9/9/18 2:24 PM, Maksim Fomin via arch-general wrote: > Really? Just rejected by heftig? The issue was rejected 4 times, first by heftig than 3 times by Scimmia: Please do not try to defend me and Scimmia when in fact we told people to take it to "more appropriate mediums"... like the mailing list, which they did in fact do *as I personally requested*, and which you are now reprimanding them for. Let's be perfectly clear here: There is *nothing* wrong with Gus' attempt at dialog and discussion -- the fact that it was closed more than once has no relevance to this discussion, as Gus tried to explain, and moreover the fact that it was initially accepted *once* then rejected *once* for the reasons clearly referenced in the initial post, is hardly hidden information. I am, however, troubled by your attacks, and consider something to be wrong with that. Heftig retracted his initial willingness to enable apparmor because he did not think it useful enough without the userland tools. It wasn't rejected because we hate the idea or consider it not Arch-like... it was rejected because on its own, it could be considered not-important-enough to warrant enabling. People now want to discuss on the mailing list why it might be worth it nevertheless. There are valid technical arguments to be made here, and so far, the initial poster has been pretty polite about it. Moreover, I agree. Even though I'm not heftig. Thank you for respecting other peoples' right to ask questions. :) -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
