I think folks not losing sleep over this are only in that position because
they don’t know it’s happening. Like Brandon said, ignorance is bliss (but
it’s a false bliss).

Very few users do the work necessary to detect data loss outside the
obvious paths. I agree with Caleb, if we log and give them no means to
remediate we are giving them nightmares with no recourse. While failed
writes will be a surprise it’s the correct solution because it’s the only
one that prevents data loss which we should always strive to get rid of.

Jordan

On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 11:31 Caleb Rackliffe <calebrackli...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> We aren’t counting on users to read NEWS.txt. That’s the point. We’re
> saying we’re going to make things safer, as they should always have been,
> and if someone out there has tooling that somehow allows them to avoid the
> risks, they can disable rejection.
>
> > On Sep 12, 2024, at 1:21 PM, Brandon Williams <dri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 1:13 PM Caleb Rackliffe
> > <calebrackli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think I can count at least 4 people on this thread who literally have
> lost sleep over this.
> >
> > Probably good examples of not being the majority though, heh.
> >
> > If we are counting on users to read NEWS.txt, can we not count on them
> > to enable rejection if this is important to them?
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Brandon
>

Reply via email to