On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 04:00:10PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 09:41:30PM +0200, nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Then I'm glad there is absolutely no plan to preempt flatpack > > technical assessment by shipping one or more GNOME apps as > > flatpack-only, leaving Fedora users for whom flatpack does not work > > yet behind, and bypassing distribution consensus processes. > > Please tone this inflammatory rhetoric down. It's not helpful. When you > said you wanted this part of the thread to close, I thought that's what > you meant and took it seriously. Matthew, as FPL I think you also shouldn't take sides here. There's a lot of inflamatory rhetoric in this thread, and it's my opinion that you've sided with what I'd call the "GNOME/Flatpak" camp, and ignored some inflamatory (and incorrect) statements they have made, which Kevin (to his credit) did not take the bait and respond to. Just my 2p, and I'll say no more. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
