Do you think this is a security risk and if not is it a bad UI decision?

[drago01]

On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 1:28 AM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-05-04 at 15:58 -0700, Dan Mashal wrote:
>
>> > If they do decide to keep the change, you could escalate it to FESCo.
>> > However, (speaking only for myself here) I would be VERY reluctant to
>> > override maintainers on their packages on something that is a design
>> > decision/judgement call. Where would we draw the line?
>>
>> I would rather have QA have move oversight on these things. As I only
>> discovered this while doing QA.
>>
>> Excuse my cynicism here but this would also require some change to the
>> QA process itself and what are blockers and what are not and the "nice
>> to have" process which should be renamed "we won't hold our breath".
>
> I don't really see any special place for QA in reviewing design
> decisions. I've said it before, but my opinion is that the job of QA is
> to determine whether things are working as intended, not to decide what
> the intentions should be.

No but if QA had adopted the "keyboard layouts must work" criterion
that I have proposed multiple times
the anaconda maintainers would have to spent their time on fixing the
real issue rather than papering over
it in such obscure ways.