---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <tails-bugs@???>
Date: Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: Bug report: 2142365f715809b8ee17371fcbb98e05
To: barkamtza2007@???
> Subject: v.3.0~beta1
> From: barkamtza2007@???
> Tails-Version: 3.0~beta1 - 20170201
>
>
> Actual result and description of the error
> ------------------------------------------
> The options to be able to defence the personal data which are stored
in the Persistence can not be taked away back because of the conclusion
of a developer (one of them) .
> It is bad practick to cut the features that are intended to the
> safety
and to the flexibility -- even the flexebility does not needed to the
programmer it can be MUST for an user :( .
Maybe you want to read
https://labs.riseup.net/code/issues/12093 to
*understand why we toook that decision.*
Hello! I do not find ANY explanation and NOT a DECISION that was done
before of eliminating the read-only persistence. Sorry, the "the final
mockups that were agreed for implementation" must be fixed: I need the
read-only persistence :( .
And again: the reduction of the existing features can not be the ordinary
practice!
Again: the 3.0~beta version of the Greeter is the cumbersome and
lengthy mechanism,
which requires a huge amount of clicks to enter only two passwords - rather
compact and perfectly understandable the current (v.2.10) Greeter, which does
*not require** even a single click* to the same procedures *and* to log in!
You declare the wish to design the clear work flow for novices -- but the
result is the opposite of the goal and are clear for novice in they FIRST
séance *only*.
