| 1 |
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 11:26:32PM +0100, Piotr Karbowski wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 12/12/2022 23.06, Sam James wrote: |
| 3 |
> > It's unusual to have discussion about a single package on the mailing lists. I tend to keep an eye on PAM |
| 4 |
> > bugs because I maintained pambase. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 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 |
| 9 |
> list, that very few people would notice bug on undeclared |
| 10 |
> maintainer-needed package, unlike mailing list, assigning it to zlogene |
| 11 |
> and hoping for few people to catch it up, yet you still zealously |
| 12 |
> challenge it. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
You did explain, somebody else still disagreed, I don't think that |
| 15 |
should be taken personally? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> I feel really burnt out from this exchange and I see that you already |
| 18 |
> base-system'd the sys-libs/pam tactically preventing me joining and |
| 19 |
> introducing changes, last time I wanted join base-system there was push |
| 20 |
> back and I was informed that only invited members can join. Do your |
| 21 |
> thing Sam, I will step back now and will take note to throw ideas into |
| 22 |
> void of bugzilla next time. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
pam is a package which is pretty obviously in-scope for the Base |
| 25 |
System project, even from a third party perspective. Based on Sam's |
| 26 |
most recent reply, that doesn't like it was a mechanism to prevent you |
| 27 |
from contributing? And since you seem to have taken it that way, why? |
| 28 |
If that were the case, I'd think the Base lead (sam) would've told |
| 29 |
you, and he hasn't (quite the opposite!). |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> -- Piotr. |
| 32 |
> |
Archives