Tyler Riddle <cardboardaardv...@gmail.com> (2025-04-22): > I appreciate that there is development effort associated with features but > my interpretation of what you are saying is that concerns about a LUKS name > can be ignored at least in terms of the Debian installer. Is my > interpretation incorrect? > Does this mean that concerns regarding long term maintenance would result > in a patch to implement my desired behavior being rejected? Or that to be > accepted such a patch would have to not only include the desired change but > also all localization requirements to be implemented as well?
I've just explained that efforts required to support that aren't as trivial as you seem to think they are. > > That benefits only users who care about that kind of things, so that > > really doesn't seem to be a question that should get asked in the > > first place. > > Are you suggesting that caring about the LUKS name is an irrelevant > detail and such concerns are unreasonable? Please clarify if my > takeaway is incorrect here. No. I understand this might important to you and a minority of users, and what I wrote is that the default installation is about the vast majority of users, who likely don't care at all and shouldn't be bothered with that question. (Independently of the cost topic mentioned above. Don't expect more engagement from my side on either bugs. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
