Hello, > I don't think it was ever mentioned that such a paste service offered > by Arch Linux would become *the official one* and that its usage > would be enforced in any way when requesting support or something (in > opposition to other similar services). > I'm not sure where that comes from? It was an implication based on the fact the email was sent from a staff members email address, which I believe is a fair implication to make. There has been times in the past where, on the mailing list, responses from Jelle and Anthraxx have been pointed out as the "official" response. How should we differentiate between an unofficial and an official stance on something if you use your @archlinux.org email address? > The exact sentence was (copy pasted from the author's email [1]) : "I > 100% support having our own paste service that's *on a trustworthy > domain like archlinux.org*". > > The domain (archlinux.org) is described as trustworthy, not the > service itself. This is an important nuance in that context (e.g who > host/manage the service and the data it collects). Apologies for the misconception. > First of all, Arch Linux and rustypaste are not corporate so there's > no "corporate buddies"/shareholders in that context. Seen as you are nitpicking every word, I will quote what I stated in my previous email for clarification: > Take our corporate buddies as an example on this point. In no way does this suggestion I was assuming Arch Linux or rustypaste corporate, it was an alternative point of view, an example. It appears you saw "corporate" and instantly rejected the point of view as invalid. > I personally have not been bothered by any potential "conflict of > interest" in their suggestion. So, to confirm, it does not bother you if a solution is picked based on personal gain instead of it being the best solution? My point was simply, if you benefit outside of Arch Linux on a choice made, surely you should only be able to comment on the issue, and excuse yourself on the choice of solution? > "rustypaste is looking for a public instance [2], could Arch Linux > host it?" Well I obviously misunderstood. Apologies yet again. But unfortunately this makes it even worse! People donate to the Arch Linux project to support Arch Linux, not third party projects developed by staff members. Surely this is betrayal to use Arch Linux funding to fund non-Arch projects? I would be all for it if Arch Linux was charging Orhun, in fact, it would be a great way to raise funding for Arch Linux, sell off the additional server resources. (I am assuming there is additional server resources) Although I stated I would not bring it up, a security flaw in rustypaste could have a knock on impact to Arch Linux. Is it worth taking on more legal burden (such as GDPR), moderation duties (ensure illegal content is not being distributed through Arch Linux servers) and the additional resources which will need to be allocated on Arch's servers? To be blunt, why should Arch Linux fund it? Its not to benefit Arch Linux users! It almost solely benefits rustypaste users, which would only really benefit the Arch Linux IRC folks (provided they pick rustypaste over the countless other pastebin solutions). Surely this opens a flood gate to a whole heap of potential requests for hosting for other staff members individual projects? > Here again, I feel like this an important nuance to understand why > the discussion is specifically about rustypaste (and not about any > other similar services). I feel like you have redirected the questions away, in avoidance, by using some misconception on my part. But then again it has always felt when things are discussed on this mailing list people never really object out of fear of causing drama, which from personal experience is taken very seriously. Why bother posting if people can't freely raise concerns? I have nothing against correcting me, but it feels like you invalidated the questions instead of corrected them and answered them, which to me, feels like avoidance. Take care, -- Polarian GPG signature: 0770E5312238C760 Jabber/XMPP: polarian@xxxxxxxxxxxx
