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

[John.Florian at dart.biz]

> From: Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com>
> 
> On Wed, 2013-05-08 at 22:36 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
> > On 2013-05-08 10:09 (GMT+0200) Pierre-Yves Chibon composed:
> > 
> > > you are replying to a 4 days old email on a thread that is no
> > > longer active?
> > 
> > A: The thread was started on a Friday night.
> > 
> > B: Some people don't get to read mail every day, or more than a few or 
less 
> > times a week.
> > 
> > A + B = perfectly justified timing of reply.
> 
> C: the debate was taken to every place it could possibly go, and the
> commit was reverted.

D: read mail, have knee jerk reaction, send email, read remainder of 
unread mail and realize A, B and C have already occurred and then decided 
it's best to read all unread mail before allowing knee to jerk the send 
button.


> So what's the point of reviving it? Sometimes, if you don't get your
> $0.02 posted in time, it's best to just sit on it.

Agreed.

--
John Florian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130509/9ad85fdf/attachment.html>