Drew's comment there explains the fundamental issue. > Drew DeVault @ddevault · 1 hour ago > Obligatory disclaimer: I work for a GitLab competitor. >Thank yo

Drew's comment there explains the fundamental issue. > Drew DeVault @ddevault · 1 hour ago > Obligatory disclaimer: I work for a GitLab competitor. >Thank you for pumping the brakes, but this is still not great news. This language is the classic "defuse, wait, and try again later" approach to shoeing in unpopular changes. You're still hedging their bets with this language, rather than renouncing the original ideas. A similar tactic we've already seen is apologising for "bad communication" instead of the real problem: bad changes. Until a real apology is issued and the changes renounced, this isn't very meaningful. "Reconsidering the approach" is CYA talk. What you're doing right now is an attempt at damage limitation instead of fixing the actual problem. Third party telemetry is a cancer that no-one wants. You, personally, don't even want it. You know you don't want it, but you're adopting the 'corporate mask'. Just stop, please. For your own good, as well as that of the wider ecosystem.