| 1 |
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto |
| 2 |
<jmbsvicetto@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> The point I was addressing is the suggestion that the above should be |
| 4 |
> possible and the idea that any single developer is "entitled" to do so. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
It's a moot point, because no one (that I see) claimed or is claiming |
| 7 |
to be entitled to that. In fact, Alec said |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> We did post to -dev, hence this thread. The point is that we don't |
| 10 |
> need any 'official opinion' to do anything; and I don't want to set |
| 11 |
> that precedent. If you have specific concerns about actions we plan |
| 12 |
> to take (which by the way, we are not planning an opt-out solution. |
| 13 |
> If we plan to do an opt-out solution, we will again have a thread on |
| 14 |
> -dev) then let us know |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
He's not saying that no official opinion would be needed if they were |
| 17 |
doing an opt-out. He's saying that they don't need an official opinion |
| 18 |
*since* they aren't doing some sort of opt-out system. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Not your fault, but this whole thread regarding the |
| 21 |
merits/legality/privacy of opt-out is completely irrelevant to the |
| 22 |
original topic. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Matt |
Archives