Developers of Sympa

[David Verdin <address@concealed>]

Hem...

I'm back from summer break. You may think it was very long. You may be right, but, hey, family and such, you know. If it makes you feel better, I'm not particularly fitter now than when I left due to children chosing the holidays season to catch any kind of disease they can find...

Well, back to the topic of Sympa. It looks like you chose the exact moment I left to engage yet another flamewar.
Seriously, guys...

I see the topic seems resolved, so I won't argue about it.

What I see, when reading the conversation, is a very strong basis of technical argument. I see that your are often offended by some of the replies the other one sends. That's not debatable: whatever the actual meaning of a sentence was, even if offence was not the writer's intention, if you feel offended, nothing can prevent it. Thats what you feel and you have your own reason to feel offended.
The problem here is that flamewars often start on premises that, on my opinion, were quite light. I don't say you're wrong to feel what you feel. Homever, I think you should not reply at once when such a situation happens. Maybe you could just take a little time before answering. Sometimes, when rereading a mail, you realize that you may have misunderstood. And even if you keep on feeling agression, try not to answer too harshly. Keep in mind that the other person may also have been offended by you, for reason you can't think of.

When two people fight, there are always reasons from both sides. Just keep that in mind and it will probably ease our collaboration.

Hem. That was the "David as a peace judge" intervention. I'll comme back to you later today with reports on Sympa, YAPC, new versions, mailings lists for the perl community, future interventions and a lot of things Étienne and I discussed while in Sofia.

Best regards !

David

Le 29/07/14 09:49, Guillaume Rousse a écrit :

Le 29/07/2014 04:47, IKEDA Soji a écrit :

# The phrase "I cannot answer a hypothetical question" is usual
# play of bureaucratic people.  Could you please stop such a
# offensive reply?

Rejecting technical arguments as offensive will indeed make discussion easier.

Besides, I just presented _an example_ for a contrapositive of
Kerckhoffs's principle: Private key must not fall into enemy hands.

Sure. No compromise. Let's defend against martian interventions too.

For more example, it may not be our pleasure that a company refrain
from adopting Sympa based on code audit by them, isn't it?

My pleasure would be than Sympa would be auditable at all. Which implies to make it readable first.

FIFO (I don't stick to this method, though) does not store
passed information to any perpetual storages.  I suppose that is why
openssl supports FIFO.

openssl doesn't make any difference between a regular file and a fifo
for this matter, but this doesn't change much here.

BTW I rethought on this issue and decided to use Crypt::SMIME.

Fine. No need to discuss anything anymore then.

--
A bug in Sympa? Quick! To the bug tracker!

David Verdin Études et projets applicatifs
Tél : +33 2 23 23 69 71 Fax : +33 2 23 23 71 21   www.renater.fr	RENATER 263 Avenue du Gal Leclerc 35042 Rennes Cedex

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: Signature cryptographique S/MIME