Re: Securing Debian HOWTO
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 04:46:34PM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:02:54AM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > Why? And why did you decide to fork it instead of just linking to it?
>
> ¿So that people don't have to dig in the website? Com'on. You cannot
> expect harden-doc (for example) to provide an incomplete manual for
> offline reading (PDF,HTML,whatever). What if the person doesn't have an
> inet connection? (i.e. has only obtained Debian through CDs).
People don't have to dig on the website if you provide a link; they just
follow it. If you want to package the security team FAQ to provide a copy
for offline reading, I see no problem with that. But please don't copy it
into another document and create a fork.
> I'm reluctant to have web-only documentation (such as the security FAQ).
> People want:
>
> 1.- documentation that can be read offline
> 2.- documentation that can be pretty-printed
>
> I'm not forking the security-FAQ I'm copying it into a document
> format that provides both. We are not giving our web-site on the
> CD-ROMs (maybe we should) but we are providing harden-doc as a
> package with this documentation.
>
> I'ts a pity that people think that bandwith is un-expensive all over the
> world or that everyone has free-Internet access. Even if it's common, and
> a plus, we don't have to take for granted that users have both.
There is nothing about the security team FAQ which makes it unable to be
read offline, any more than your document. That argument is nonsensical.
Printing is a different matter, and if that is your concern, then perhaps
you could offer to reformat the FAQ so that it can generate both HTML and
printed documentation. But I do not think that it belongs as part of this
HOWTO (or harden-doc for that matter).
> > > Will do. Feel free to submit a patch.
> >
> > Two patches are attached, one for the security team FAQ and one for the
> > Debian Developer's Reference.
>
> I had already linked to the DD's reference before you sent the patch
> BTW. The Securing Debian section was introduced *before* it was
> written in the DD's reference.
Thanks.
> I will sync with the Security's FAQ, but I will *not* remove it. I
> will add a link refering to the main (approved) document. But it
> makes much more sense to have a FAQ in the Manual that *includes*
> the Security Team's. And it's not a fork.
You are copying it and modifying it. That is a fork. It is better that you
are synching it, but it seems better to have a single authoritative source.
--
- mdz
Reply to: