David Cantrell wrote:
> From what I'm reading in the meeting logs and the ticket comments, it
> appears the revert decision is basically a temporary solution and a more
> formal security policy will be discussed later. We had technical
> arguments in favor of the change originally, but I have yet to see
> technical arguments against the change come together in any sort of
> concrete policy.
[...]
> Without an official policy on the matter and only a temporary solution for
> now, upstream won't be changing. Fedora will need to carry this deviation
> as a patch in package git for F-22.
In other words, you want to give in only temporarily for one release and we
will have to fight this nonsense again at every single release?
Why can't you just take a "no" as a "no"?
It is not Anaconda's job to reject perfectly valid passwords just because it
doesn't like them. Even the empty string is a valid password.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
