On Fri, 2021-01-08 at 17:29 +0100, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > On 2021-01-08 17:03, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > I strongly object to you pushing this patch as-is. There have been > > plenty of non-technical objections, including from the eclass > > maintainer. > > The eclass maintainer has disqualified himself going into a technical > debate with saying > > > So, over my dead commit access. > > in his first posting.
Please remind me, who granted your the power to disqualify maintainers? > This is a technical mailing list. Currently, acct-* stuff is breaking > stuff. Nobody has challenged this yet. No, it is not. It is behaving as described. What really happens is that you rejected the design, deliberately broke your system and now are trying to push your design over false arguments. > It's not like we cannot address the other stuff later. It's about > getting the fix down to users who are currently affected by this. So why > take hostage when some user(s) ignore the problem for more than a year > and show that they are not interested in collaboration to find a > solution for a technical problem they created despite warnings before > this went live? Yes, surely me abandoning other work to provide a patch on the same day proves that I am 'not interested in collaboration to find a solution'. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
