Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 20:56:40 -0600 From: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net> To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sendmail 8.8.4 questions... Message-ID: <l03010903aecbe7b57b06@[208.2.87.4]> In-Reply-To: <199612050221.TAA13306@rocky.mt.sri.com> References: <l03010901aecbd9af2f53@[208.2.87.4]> <199612050117.RAA02670@salsa.gv.ssi1.com> <nate@mt.sri.com> <199612050121.SAA12964@rocky.mt.sri.com> <l03010901aecbd9af2f53@[208.2.87.4]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> replies: >> >I'd rather the 'users' find a new way (that doesn't involved the >> >developers) of distributing patches. You don't need us to do it since >> >you are capable of supporting yourselves. >> >> Well, that implies that "we" take over the commit tree for the 2.1 system. >> Do you really want changes that are not committed into the official CVS >>tree? > >I don't care what "WE-you" do with the tree since "WE-us" aren't going >to be providing any 'offical' patches AFAIK. > >> Do "we" have permission to use the "FreeBSD 2.1" name? > >You aren't providing a release, you are providing patches to a FreeBSD >release. *Anyone* is allowed to do that, you don't need any blessing or >permission to do that. And that defeats the whole purpose of the effort. Only the "FreeBSD organization" can OFFICIALLY address solutions to security problems. If someone else distributes patches, then, rather than increasing the opinion of users, it will actually reflect negatively on the organization because it shows that the organization "doesn't care". It really is too bad that "you" developers have such a limited viewpoint. All you want to your plaything. It doesn't matter to you whether or not it is useful in the "real world". That attitude is definitely a limiting factor.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?l03010903aecbe7b57b06>