Something new was tried in the hopes it'd be good, it turned out not to be
good, it was reverted, and now there's some discussion about how to make it
better. That's a successful process, not an unsuccessful one.
Given that this exact method of doing things is not only well-established
on the
On 19-01-18 22:12:22, Pine W wrote:
I'm glad that this problematic change to communications was reverted.
Clarification: Enabling this plugin wasn't reverted, a configuration
change was made to the default settings of the plugin.
Thanks to the helpful suggestions on this thread, it's my
Am 19.01.19 um 03:46 schrieb Chad:
> All examples of files that are edited by dozens of folks. Folks who could
> very well be unqualified to review your change and/or completely
> uninterested in it at all.
Coming to think of it, it would be much more useful to base the suggestion on
who has
