| 1 |
On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 12:26:04 -0500 |
| 2 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> |
| 5 |
> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 10:17:54 -0500 |
| 7 |
> > Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> I haven't heard anybody propose a new plan. I certainly am not |
| 10 |
> >> proposing one. |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > The part you cut: |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> >> |
| 15 |
> >> You shouldn't use rsync anymore, it is inherently insecure. The git |
| 16 |
> >> tree is _properly_ gpg signed so you can verify it's correctness. |
| 17 |
> >> |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> That was just a random developer offering random advice. People are |
| 20 |
> welcome to do that on the lists. Nobody is preventing anybody from |
| 21 |
> fixing the bug. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> There is no approved grandiose plan to obsolete rsync. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Hence me asking where the discussion took place... |
| 26 |
Y'know, the email you replied to :) |
Archives