Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 14:20:29 -0800 From: "David F. Severski" <davidski@deadheaven.com> To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/128999: [vuxml] [patch] update audio/streamripper to 1.64.0, fix CVE-2008-4829 Message-ID: <20081124222029.GM85200@geoff.deadheaven.com> In-Reply-To: <731a66520811241406r6269274ft8a41666efd85560d@mail.gmail.com> References: <200811230855.mAN8tmXo091500@freefall.freebsd.org> <731a66520811241055x62a013at71bc1d08bcc6bda8@mail.gmail.com> <492B2242.4080102@vwsoft.com> <731a66520811241406r6269274ft8a41666efd85560d@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:06:56PM +0100, William Palfreman wrote: > That's nice. I am sure it is very useful on the ports mailinglist > where it belongs. I also greatly enjoy the frequent interesting and > informed discussion on the security mailinglist - of which Eirik > Overby's thread recently about syn+fin is one example. But all these > ports announcements, raw patches, garbled html etc. I could really do > without. It is why there are separate lists. Was there a discussion or even an announcement indicating that the security-related port commit messages would be sent to freebsd-security? This seems to have started just this month. Like William, I also find the explosion of commit messages and bug tracking minutia detracts from the low volume and high value of the freebsd-security list. The list description on mailman indicates the intent of the list is to be a 'high-signal, low-noise discussion of issues affecting the security of FreeBSD.' Including every single obliquely security related port commit seems counter to this intention. I'd very much like to see a separate list for the automated port postings, leaving this list to it's historical usage. David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081124222029.GM85200>