> If you went ahead and implemented thoughtfully and sent a patch there’s a good chance it would get merged. Poettering has made it abundantly clear that he wi

> If you went ahead and implemented thoughtfully and sent a patch there’s a good chance it would get merged. Poettering has made it abundantly clear that he will not accept patches that implement arbitrary filtering. There has been very little engagement on his part with people who have legitimate issues that this would resolve, and appears unwilling to accept that there are use-cases where arbitrarily filtering log data at ingestion time has benefits. Why anyone, myself included, would put the time and effort in to developing a patch that it's clear is ideologically opposed by the gatekeepers of that project is beyond me.