Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 19:16:08 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: desktop@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 266532] x11/lightdm: Login sessions do not respect login.conf Message-ID: <bug-266532-39348-f1eUFqiEdv@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-266532-39348@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-266532-39348@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D266532 --- Comment #18 from Guido Falsi <madpilot@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Ivan Rozhuk from comment #17) > Is POLA include bugs? ) Well actually it could, but that's not the point here. There is no bug. It looks to me you have a very personal definition of bug = and of how to "solve" them. > Or these 2 scripts may be distributed separately and sample config may us= e it by default. Great idea, why don't you file a bug report for anew port which includes t= hese two scripts and all the glue needed to install them? Maybe someone would pi= ck it up (not me, obviously) > sw cursor + heavy load like llvm/chromium compilation. > This is very simple change to improve user experience without any risk of= side effects. The point is that changing Xorg priority is not a bugfix, but a local workaround that each user can choose to apply locally, and is not something that we should impose from the official ports. Personally I don't consider what you describe as a bug or even an annoyance. But that's me. > This is very simple change to improve user experience without any risk of= side effects. This is your opinion, but is against port rules. Any patch included in the ports tree should also be sent upstream [1] so your proposal of including a patch that is not good enough to be upstreamed is not acceptable by the por= ts rules. Also not upstreaming patches is a big problem with the ports tree. Differen= ces with upstream accumulate and we are handling ports here, not forks. So yes, if upstreeam has a bug, the bug is expected to also exist in the po= rt. It can be fixed in the port before the upstream but in such a way to be upstreamed. Anyway I'm not considering these scripts for inclusion. I would not feel comfortable committing them. But this will not stop you from writing to the mailing lists or seeking other committer's interest in them. [1] https://docs.freebsd.org/en/articles/contributing/#_maintainer_responsibili= ties --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-266532-39348-f1eUFqiEdv>