[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: hurd does NOT need /hurd

On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 09:52:49PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2002 at 12:24:35PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > > *shrug* I'm unlikely to consider a quick hack done at the very last
> > > minute a reliable firewalling tool.
> > You don't know what I mean, so you could at least try to find out what I
> > mean first or spare your judgement until it is done.
> If you do it when we're trying to finalise everything ready for release
> I'm not going to be able to make a rational judgement, and I'm going to
> immediately assume the lack of interest, care and time in its development
> has resulted in a shoddy product that's not going to work reliably.

See, you are doing it again.  You seem not to have not the slightest idea
of what I am thinking of to make firewalling happen in the Hurd
in a matter of days, and still you think you can already say
what the result will most likely look like.

> If you do a quick hack and it has a few months of use and it's found to
> work adequately well, that's fine.

Well, are you offering to test it?

> ] But if that's what is required to get an otherwise completely functional
> ] system to be rubber stamped by the release manager, I might just as
> ] well waste a day or two on it, so that the other effort is saved. I am
> ] prepared to talk about this again (if there is still a need) a couple
> ] of weeks before the next freeze.
> That isn't the sort of attitude that results in quality software, and
> it's at its least acceptable when we're talking about security tools.

I agree.  I prefer to not have a firewall feature at all over the quick
hack I am thinking of.  This gives a clear message: If you need a
firewall, look somewhere else.  And I don't see the problem here,
really.  If people find out there is no firewall, and they think they
need one, they can get one elsewhere.

> You're welcome to say "Hurd's ready to release now" even when it's not,
> and you don't have to back it up. You're welcome to say "Debian's not
> ready to release yet" the day after it releases, and you don't even have
> to back that up. I don't get to do any of those things.

I respect that you are doing this as the release manager, and because
you think it is necessary.


To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: