1 |
On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 12:52:42AM +0100 or thereabouts, Peter Simons wrote: |
2 |
> There is a certain irony to the fact that you (and others) |
3 |
> go on and on lecturing me (and others), all the while it is |
4 |
> perfectly obvious that you have absolutely no idea what this |
5 |
> problem really *means*. |
6 |
|
7 |
Perhaps you haven't done a good job of educating us, then. |
8 |
|
9 |
I will say that I was one of the folks arguing most strongly for getting |
10 |
ebuild signing support in portage, so I certainly see the value in that |
11 |
feature. I also see the value in getting signed eclasses in portage, but I |
12 |
believe that value to be less and not as important as other things within |
13 |
portage that I'd like to see. |
14 |
|
15 |
> So if you guys would like to be the laughing stock of the |
16 |
> free software community once this vulnerability is exploited |
17 |
> for the first time, all I say is: Be my guest. |
18 |
|
19 |
Gentoo is a community-based distribution. I'm sorry you see it as an "us |
20 |
vs. them" thing. I'm also sorry you apparently ignored the part where I |
21 |
said that if you believe this to be a serious problem, then please feel |
22 |
free to provide patches that fix it. Being a community-based distro, we |
23 |
rely on each other to make Gentoo a better distribution. We don't wait for |
24 |
"them" to fix problems. Instead, we roll up our sleeves and become part of |
25 |
the solution. Just because I don't personally agree with your |
26 |
interpretation of this issue doesn't mean that you can't fix it. |
27 |
|
28 |
--kurt |