On 2021.02.19 22:10, Diederik de Haas wrote:
So don't shoot down other solutions if you aren't or can't be certain they're
incorrect.
Again, I am not trying to shoot down other solutions.
You are misreading way too much into what I stated, and this is starting
to get a bit annoying.
All I said is that, technically, your proposal might not qualify with
what OP appeared to be after, and elaborated on why that might be the case.
Then I brought back the discussion to how some of the drawbacks of the
current pre-buit image distribution requirements might be alleviated
through a different method. And yes, I am trying to push for that new
method to become as established a "standard" as the pre-built image one,
precisely because I do anticipate the usual pushback that comes with
trying to implement something different, in order to try to solve some
of the pain points of a long established ecosystem.
If you think that qualifies as "shooting down", so be it, but then I
have no choice but to retort that you appear to be continuing to place
intent in my statement, that was never present.
Unless
Regards,
/Pete
