Re: Patch Acceptance Procedure

From: Greg KH (gregat_private)
Date: Mon Jul 23 2001 - 17:13:09 PDT

  • Next message: Seth Arnold: "Re: Patch Acceptance Procedure"

    On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 04:56:22PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote:
    > 
    > We keep cutting down the amount of change we ask for to support
    > our policy. Richard's last patch was quite small, but included
    > fds, which some people don't see need for but which we have to
    > have, really. I feels as if our policy requirements are
    > being sacrificed in the name of "concensus", when in fact
    > there is no serious objection, only that some others
    > "don't see the need" for what we require.
    
    I didn't apply Richards last patch for the following reasons, which I
    stated at the time:
    	- it did 3 different things
    	- I only thought one of those things was relevant today (I can't
    	  remember what the 2nd thing it did was, and don't feel like
    	  going back and looking it up...)
    	- my insistence on not adding any patches for audit capabilities
    	  right now as they are not a goal for this project at this
    	  point in time (remember the roadmap?)
    
    
    Please, can we have some discussion about all of the recent network
    patches that have been posted!  That would be constructive right now.
    
    thanks,
    
    greg k-h
    
    _______________________________________________
    linux-security-module mailing list
    linux-security-moduleat_private
    http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Jul 23 2001 - 17:14:24 PDT