宋文武 <iyzs...@outlook.com> writes: > Leo Prikler <leo.prik...@student.tugraz.at> writes: > >> Hi Mark, >> >> Am Samstag, den 01.05.2021, 18:12 -0400 schrieb Mark H Weaver: >>> Hi Leo, >>> >>> Leo Prikler <leo.prik...@student.tugraz.at> writes: >>> >>> > Am Samstag, den 01.05.2021, 19:02 +0200 schrieb Giovanni Biscuolo: >>> > > I also spent some time re-reading messages that Mark sent in this >>> > > thread and, like him, I really don't understand what Mark did >>> > > wrong. >>> > > >>> > > For sure Mark /insisted/ that Raghav and Léo did something wrong >>> > > with >>> > > some commits, we can say Mark did it being /direct/ and >>> > > /accusatory/ >>> > > but we cannot really say Mark assumed bad faith from them. >>> > He did wrong insofar as his accusatory message read as though he >>> > was >>> > assuming bad faith > > Hello Leo, I see nothing wrong for assuming bad faith when security > fixes of packages are removed, in the end the truth matter, which I > believe is: You thought the patches for cario is not needed now on > core-updates, so you remove them.
Sorry, I'm not a native English speaker, what I mean is "for assuming bad intent", or more clearly: "for assuming that you remove thoese security patches to introduce backdoors on purpose". I don't think Mark try to prove you're lying from his messages, if that's what "assumed bad faith" means...
