4 ms·
The ToS was the only thing that had changed, telemetry had not been implemented yet. We've rolled the ToS changes back and are reconsidering our approach based
by emilycook 7y ago
The ToS was the only thing that had changed, telemetry had not been implemented yet. We've rolled the ToS changes back and are reconsidering our approach based on the feedback: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/growth/product/issues/164 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/growth/product/issues/164
- ralmeida 7y agoIt's a good thing you are reconsidering the approach, but I don't see how this is related to this "title subthread". At the time this subthread started, the title was "Gitlab mandating third-party telemetry, locks out user access until accepted" and these things were, in fact, true at that time. The fact that telemetry had not yet implemented did not change the fact that it was being mandated. I would like to also note that my stance that the non-original title (at the time) was fine does not have anything to do with that title "looking bad" for GitLab. For example, the title now is "Gitlab ‘rethinking’ third-party telemetry", which is also not the original title, looks somewhat good for GitLab and I think it's fine.
- emilycook 7y agoSorry for being unclear I wasn't trying to refute the accuracy of the title, only to provide additional context that was missed by us in the first place. I think if anything it's really not my place to have a say in what the title says.