From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EZDSZ-00064Q-MZ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 20:19:20 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jA7KEg8I010411; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:14:42 GMT Received: from hermes.orakel.ods.org (dsl67-66.fastxdsl.nl [62.251.66.67]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jA7KAYt8030658 for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 20:10:34 GMT Received: from aphrodite.orakel.ods.org ([172.17.2.15]) by hermes.orakel.ods.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.54) id 1EZDK5-0007Bb-8H for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 21:10:34 +0100 Message-ID: <436FB4BB.3020205@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 21:10:35 +0100 From: Grobian Organization: Gentoo Foundation User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.4.1 (Macintosh/20051006) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 "Critical News Reporting" Round Two References: <20051105005814.0de0d8ff@snowdrop.home> <436C8951.4010008@gentoo.org> <20051105111006.GA14844@kloeri> <436C9798.5020805@gentoo.org> <20051105114729.GB14844@kloeri> <436CAC58.4090809@gentoo.org> <1131309435.8543.16.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <20051106214747.4e6a9cff@snowdrop.home> <1131382994.8546.34.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <436F9DC6.8040106@gentoo.org> <1131390151.7826.20.camel@Memoria.anyarch.net> <1131390881.7826.24.camel@Memoria.anyarch.net> In-Reply-To: <1131390881.7826.24.camel@Memoria.anyarch.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Scanned: by hermes.orakel.ods.org (Exim Exiscan) using SpamAssassin and ClamAV X-Archives-Salt: 48771432-8de7-4335-959f-398570087606 X-Archives-Hash: 998417393d448a27c6738c73da1242bd Daniel Ostrow wrote: >> You are correct, there is no clear cut place for them to go...that's how >> this thing got started in the first place. However why force users to >> sign up for something which can't be appropriately filtered (installed >> packages, keywords, use flags, profiles, etc.) when all of them are >> already "signed up" for something that can track and filter, portage. >> >> I wouldn't necessarily bother signing up for an errata list if said list >> was going to provide me with *all* the errata out there. The reason that >> a mailing list works for RedHat is because RHN tracks what packages you >> have installed on your system on *their* server (again something you >> have to sign up for, and worse send them info about your configuration), >> so the filtering is done for you. We will *never* do something like >> this, we have a client side tool that can identify what is installed >> already...why not use it? What if an admin just wants to see all errata messages because (s)he doesn't feel like aggregating the unique messages from a whole cluster of machines running Gentoo with all different packages installed? It is a well-known fact that removing seemingly useless background noise can cause relations between problems not to be recognised. Some users know that and hence would like to see all errata. Our GLSAs are sent out exactly in the same way, but there is not a word on them in the GLEP, neither does anyone seem to care about them, while they seem to me at least ***VERY*** important, that is, much more important than a message about breaking my installation. And they aren't even personalised! Users don't care about security[1], adminstrators do. Administrators don't care about breaking installations[2], users do. About the RHN subscription thing, that service is IMHO quite expensive (certainly not free) and not available to Fedora Core users. I don't think you _want_ to compare Gentoo Linux Free support to support provided by commercial entities for an annual membership fee. The issue whether news or GLSAs are important and whether they can be read or not is of relevance with regard to the motivation of the GLEP which assumes it doesn't work for anybody, while I claim it 1) doesn't work because the information is hard to find and 2) it will work for a certain group of people very well if the information would be there. To conclude my far too lengthy replies here: I'd like to see some recognition that the world isn't that flat as the GLEP suggests, thereby including opportunities for everyone to be happy with the GLEP. I already stated this in my first reply in my part on "use-scenarios". Don't worry I'll shut up now as there is clearly no interest for a bit broader thinking. [1] (linux) desktop users are of a much lower target than big companies for security exploits [2] administrators try out package upgrades on a spare box first, users usually don't have such box, or risk the potential impact -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo for Mac OS X Project -- Interim Lead -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list