![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 11:01:42AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Wed, 12 Jan 2005, Greg KH wrote: > > > > So you would be for a closed list, but there would be no incentive at > > all for anyone on the list to keep the contents of what was posted to > > the list closed at any time? That goes against the above stated goal of > > complying with RFPolicy. > > There's already vendor-sec. I assume they follow RFPolicy already. If it's > just another vendor-sec, why would you put up a new list for it? I think the issue is that there is no main "security" contact for the kernel. If we want to make vendor-sec that contact, fine, but we better warn the vendor-sec people :) > In other words, if you allow embargoes and vendor politics, what would the > new list buy that isn't already in vendor-sec. vendor-sec handles a lot of other stuff that is not kernel related (every package that is in a distro.) This would only be for the kernel. thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||