Do you think this is a security risk and if not is it a bad UI decision?
olav at vitters.nl
Wed May 8 07:54:02 UTC 2013
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:51:22AM -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> On 05/04/2013 12:30 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 11:24:01PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >>Matthew, with all due respect the tone of the bug doesn't make me think
> >>that there is a lot of interest in discussion from the developers.
> >Reopening bugs is generally a good way of ensuring that there's even
> >less interest in discussion from the developers, and posting to mailing
> >lists that most of the developers concerned don't read has pretty
> >obvious problems in terms of changing their minds.
> From the process point of view, it does look a little
> obstructionist: "No, we won't discuss it in Bugzilla"; "No we won't
> discuss it in fedora-devel either". Reminds me of the joke: "Lunch
> on Tuesday? Sorry, can't do it on Tuesday---how about Never? is
> Never good for you?". I understand your point that the concerned
> Anaconda developers may simply not see the traffic, but they do know
> about the Bugzilla entry and this discussion on the devel list, so I
> hope that they could find it in their heart to put out their
> argument in the forum with the largest possible audience which at
> the moment seems to be here.
The simple explanation is:
- Bugzilla is awful to have a discussion. It is to solve bugs and focus
on how to solve a particular bug
- If you want a discussion, hold it with the developers
> Big changes deserve more explanation and outreach from the
> developers, not just dropping them in everyone's lap.
Define "big". To any developer, this change is minor. Usually "big" or
"invasive" is explained as "I have an issue with it", no matter how
More information about the devel