Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Sam James <sam@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] pam: thoughts on modernizing pam_limits configuration that Gentoo ships with
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 22:53:33
Message-Id: F73CC0ED-6B0A-4FC0-B851-5CBFDDD2D118@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] pam: thoughts on modernizing pam_limits configuration that Gentoo ships with by Piotr Karbowski
1 > On 12 Dec 2022, at 22:26, Piotr Karbowski <slashbeast@g.o> wrote:
2 >
3 > On 12/12/2022 23.06, Sam James wrote:
4 >> It's unusual to have discussion about a single package on the mailing lists. I tend to keep an eye on PAM
5 >> bugs because I maintained pambase.
6 >> Bugs are the primary method of discussing changes to packages.
7 >
8 > You really came strong on this one. I did explain why it went to mailing list, that very few people would notice bug on undeclared maintainer-needed package, unlike mailing list, assigning it to zlogene and hoping for few people to catch it up, yet you still zealously challenge it.
9 >
10
11 I'm not trying to challenge or come on strong on anything. I'm just saying it was unexpected?
12
13 > I feel really burnt out from this exchange and I see that you already base-system'd the sys-libs/pam tactically preventing me joining and introducing changes, last time I wanted join base-system there was push back and I was informed that only invited members can join. Do your thing Sam, I will step back now and will take note to throw ideas into void of bugzilla next time.
14 >
15
16 There is nothing tactical here, we discussed it in #gentoo-base, and you're free to ask to join if you want?
17
18 (It was not instead of you doing anything, it was just something I'd been planning on anyway, but
19 prompted by your email like the commit message said.)
20
21 I definitely never gave you pushback like that.

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature