Re: side issues of baloney with that ham...(was LSM changes for 2.5.59)

From: David Wagner (dawat_private)
Date: Wed Feb 12 2003 - 14:07:18 PST

  • Next message: 'Christoph Hellwig': "What went wrong with LSM, was: Re: [BK PATCH] LSM changes for 2.5.59"

    LA Walsh wrote:
    >In the same spirit, just a gentle reminder, Mr. Schaufler is a manager
    >at a commercial company that receives most of its revenue from IRIX
    >based machines.  [...] his views 
    >and actions may not reflect the best interests of the Linux Security 
    >Community or any of the individuals involved.
    
    I'm not sure how this is relevant.  In my experience, the LSM mailing
    list doesn't judge people's ideas by what big names[*] or big money they
    can throw around; we judge ideas on their technical merits.
    
    Likewise, we're not going to accept or reject your ideas just because
    a former colleague of yours tells us to do so -- proposals are going to
    be accepted or rejected on their merits.
    
    
    [*] Well, ok, if Linus or a respected maintainer tells us "do X", that
    advice would almost certainly carry extra weight with me.  But part of
    that extra weight comes from their long-standing experience and wisdom
    on the topic.
    _______________________________________________
    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 : Wed Feb 12 2003 - 14:31:55 PST