Re: [gentoo-hardened] Hardened Gentoo RSBAC deprecation and removal notice

[Javier J. Martínez Cabezón]

2008/12/29 Gordon Malm <gengor@g.o>:

> 1. Leaving existing documentation in place would mislead viewers into
> believing some level of official support is available.
>

You can put an addon indicating it, something like this: Please take
note that gentoo hardened finished the support of rsbac since (put the
year do you want here), the information you will find here could be:
a) wrong b) obsoleted and c)incomplete. It is here for historical
reasons or if someone could find useful.

> 2. There's no one on the team who uses RSBAC and can verify the documentation
> is current, correct (and keep it that way) and won't do harm.

The same as before, and I add one more thing, documentation should be
orientative not taken as one absolute truth. So reader "should"
investigate more later.

>
> 3.  Why would we continue to host documentation for a technology that is not
> supported or available in Hardened Gentoo proper?  Are you propsing we also
> host documentation for other technologies we don't utilize - AppArmor for
> instance?
>

Let's make a comparison: you go to a library near your home, you see
that all the workstations there works with windows vista. You ask for
one book related with gnu/linux and they say to you: well since we
finished working with this systems we decide to remove all books
related with GNU/Linux. I don't want mean that you write documentation
about projects not supported directly, if not removing information
that already exists and that some people could find useful (sometimes
I consult it for example). Information is information wherever it was,
lose information is one thing that I find non-sense.


> 4.  There are plenty of good places to put non-official documentation, such as
> gentoo-wiki.com.
>
> 5. The documentation is forever available @
> http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/hardened/rsbac/
>
> I am truly sorry it has come to this, but "it is what it is".
Did you link this in the main (or nearly principal) page?, so would be
this information easy to reach by one person looking for something
related with rsbac?
>
> Sincerely,
> Gordon Malm (gengor)
With all thanks for all your work.

>
> On Sunday, December 28, 2008 21:42:05 Javier J. Martínez Cabezón wrote:
>> Why do you want to remove all rsbac related documentation?, I think is
>> a non-sense to do this. Documentation does not harm anybody and in
>> case of rsbac is almost nonexistent .
>>
>> I'm an rsbac user (maybe one of the last) and a gentoo hardened one, I
>> have never used gentoo rsbac ebuilds, so for me is not any kind of
>> change.
>> Maybe you could put your opinion in the main page of the mandatory
>> access controls related (something like rsbac is not longer maintained
>> in gentoo so we suggest you to change to by this reason and this one
>> and this one.... blahblahblah).
>>
>> 2008/12/29 Gordon Malm <gengor@g.o>:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Hardened Gentoo has been without an RSBAC maintainer for quite a long
>> > time now.
>> >
>> > Support for RSBAC in Hardened Gentoo is discontinued effective
>> > immediately. RSBAC-related ebuilds, bugs and documents will begin being
>> > purged starting January 31st, 2009.
>> >
>> > All users of RSBAC in Hardened Gentoo who require mandatory or role based
>> > access control are strongly encouraged to migrate to Grsecurity's RBAC or
>> > SELinux at this time.  Anyone wishing to continue using RSBAC will be
>> > without support from the Hardened Gentoo project.
>> >
>> > The RSBAC project itself continues as normal @ http://www.rsbac.org.
>> >
>> > Sincerely,
>> > Gordon Malm (gengor)
>
>
>
>