Re: bincancels in linux.kernel

["Marco d'Itri" <md@Linux.IT>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1356 bytes --]

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

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]