Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 5 Dec 2002 01:44:07 +0100 | From | "Marco d'Itri" <> | Subject | Re: bincancels in linux.kernel |
| |
On Dec 05, Andrew Gierth <andrew@erlenstar.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Marco> I'm not sure if there is a consensus about binaries in linux.* > Marco> groups which do not match *.binar*. OTOH last year I added > Marco> linux.* to the default cleanfeed configuration linux.* in the > Marco> list of groups where binaries are permitted and nobody ever > Marco> complained. >did they notice, though? Who knows? But I suppose they will notice if this would ever become a problem.
>(I'd suggest linux.binaries.*, if not for the fact that people would >probably start posting distribution CDs and apps there.) Everything should be gated below linux.binaries.* then... The reason I think it's acceptable to not do this is that the traffic is low even when a few binaries are gated. Someday[1] I plan to create a linux.binaries.patches group to distribute kernel patches, but as usual it will be moderated.
> Marco> If you want to be sure that the hierarchy is not hijacked by > Marco> warez kiddies you can just cancel everything not posted from > Marco> /\.bofh\.it$/. >you could have put that in cleanfeed too :-) At the time I still hoped to be able to switch the groups to moderated soon.
[1] Or closer, if somebody will contribute a script able to detect new kernel patches in a kernel.org mirror... -- ciao, Marco [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |