Re: CVS commit: src

[Maxime Villard <max%m00nbsd.net@localhost>]

Le 21/12/2019 à 00:05, Taylor R Campbell a écrit :
> Security-team is not perfect.  We're happy to discuss a better way to
> disable filemon provisionally, and/or how to better address the
> existing users if we are to delete it -- after you do as core asked
> you to do to resolve the interim dispute by restoring the tree.
>
> This is a social process.  We can work together to make it better for
> everyone, but you have to be willing to work with the community,
> including accepting rulings by core to resolve disputes.

I'm afraid you, Taylor, don't have a monopoly on representing the community.

It just so happens that I, too, as a regular member and also as a main
kernel developer, represent the community; and I don't think the community
is really happy with how secteam disabled filemon without discussion. The
community is likely even less happy with how it was disabled, considering
that a quick discussion has already highlighted two apparent better ways
to disable it.

It appears that core and secteam failed to work properly with the
community.

To resolve this dispute, I have proposed to revert both my removal, and
secteam's broken disabling. This gives a clear basis to start a discussion
on what to do with filemon exactly.

Is core fine with that? Or are there double standards at play here?

Maxime