| 1 |
On 10/13/2011 06:09 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: |
| 2 |
> Samuli Suominen schrieb: |
| 3 |
>> you're right. sorry. that came out too harsh. lets rephrase this as: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> No offense taken :) |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>> "This /topic should be in the end-quiz, and mentioned in the mentoring |
| 8 |
>> guide to cover basis as part of the KEYWORDS visibility handling." |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> This is something that I have been asking for all the time. If you think |
| 11 |
> that what qutecom did should be illegal in Gentoo, then disallow it in |
| 12 |
> policy or code. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Drop that "should be" act, please. It looks as if you were still |
| 15 |
suggesting it was fine to do what qutecom did... |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Merely saying if we had some documentation snippet, or an end-quiz |
| 18 |
question for this, QA could more easily/faster revoke access if someone |
| 19 |
were to do this intentionally in tree. This could be minor motivation |
| 20 |
for me to write such snippet, but it's definately not near top on my TODO. |
Archives