![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005, Dave Jones wrote: > > When issues get leaked, the incentive for a researcher to use the > same process again goes away, which hurts us. Basically, trying > to keep them happy is in our best interests. Not so. _balancing_ their happiness with our needs is what's in our best interests. Yes, we should encourage them to tell us, but totally bending over backwards is definitely the wrong thing to do. In fact, right now we seem to encourage even people who do _not_ necessarily want the delay and secrecy to go over to vendor-sec, just because the vendor-sec people are clearly arguing even against alternatives. Which is something I do not understand. The _apologia_ for vendor-sec is absolutely stunning. Even if there are people who want to only interface with a fascist vendor-sec-style absolute secrecy list, THAT IS NOT AN EXCUSE TO NOT HAVE OPEN LISTS IN _ADDITION_! In other words, I really don't understand this total subjugation by people to the vendor-sec mentaliy. It's a disease, I tell you. Linus - 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 13:09 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||