Skip to content

Conversation

@polarathene
Copy link
Contributor

@polarathene
Copy link
Contributor Author

polarathene commented Aug 27, 2025

@guoqingbao you should not have accepted #279

This PR is a far better solution that better addresses the concern raised.

The related OneAPI repo addition they contributed in the past already had issues that were addressed here


That author is known to be incompetent with their contributions to Dockerfile.

  • I have frequently explained to them when they have misunderstandings (with verbose proof) that they choose to ignore.
  • After ignoring my feedback, they sneak their changes in through another PR attempt.

The first instance I noticed this subversive behaviour with PRs was their original Dockerfile contribution to candle-vllm (despite receiving earlier feedback blocking a similar PR of theirs for mistral.rs).

We've already reverted some changes they snuck passed review before. #279 was effectively changes plucked from #238 (despite the author being informed their solution was not appropriate).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant