|From:||Richard Hughes <hughsient-AT-gmail.com>|
|To:||Development discussions related to Fedora <fedora-devel-list-AT-redhat.com>|
|Subject:||Re: Security policy oversight needed?|
|Date:||Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:38:34 +0000|
2009/11/19 Paul W. Frields <email@example.com>: > It makes sense to me for the upstream defaults to be fairly > restrictive, with changes being made downstream in distros (and their > remixes/spins) to loosen those up as needed. In other words, our > desktop package group would include whatever was needed to induce the > desired behavior in the Desktop spin. A good bit of this issue would > need to be addressed upstream though. (Maybe I just repeated what you > said, not sure if I caught the nuance.) Yes, this makes a lot of sense, and if I was to redo the F12 experience again this is what I would have done. At the moment we're asking the server spin to essentially close the door, when maybe we should start with a closed door, and be asking the desktop spin to open it up a little more. Richard. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Copyright © 2009, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds