David Uhden Collado <daviduhden@gmail.com> wrote:

> Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > David Uhden Collado <daviduhden@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> I understand that large patches require more caution and more review
> >> time. What I find discouraging is that their size seems to create an
> >> immediate presumption that the work is untrustworthy or LLM-generated.
> > The problem is not trust of the code.
> > You have demonstrated behaviours that make you untrustworthy.
> > 
> Theo,
> 
> I understand why new contributors are not trusted immediately, but open
> source also depends on people seeing a problem and trying to fix it.
> 
> I focus my limited time on the work I consider most important, so I tend
> to start with larger problems rather than submitting small patches to
> build trust or prestige.
> 
> Some people are also still learning, and limited knowledge or
> misunderstood tone can lead to mistakes. Nobody is perfect or
> infallible, so trust should ultimately come from reviewing the work
> itself.

You were asked if you wrote it.
You wouldn't answer the question, but instead wrote a long letter
about legal liability and how it could not affect _YOU_, but clearly
since you would not answer the question it affects the project.

Whether you wrote it or not was the most important question but it
appears your principles are very seriously misaligned with the
requirements of an open source project which is a combination work.

I hope someone else does what you did to fvwm from first principles
but you are simply not trustworthy.

Sorry, but I think we are done here.  I recommend you review how
we got here.