[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071025004128.GC3660@sequoia.sous-sol.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 17:41:28 -0700
From: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>,
Thomas Fricaccia <thomas_fricacci@...oo.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Crispin Cowan <crispin@...spincowan.com>,
Giacomo Catenazzi <cate@...ian.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Linux Security *Module* Framework (Was: LSM conversion to
static interface)
* Linus Torvalds (torvalds@...ux-foundation.org) wrote:
> Do other people want to stand up and be "LSM maintainers" in the sense
> that they also end up being informed members who can also stand up for new
> modules and help merge them, rather than just push the existing one(s)?
> Chris? Casey? Crispin?
Stephen and James, despite their clear bias towards SELinux, do try to
give good feedback. But you are right, there's not enough active help
for people trying to make a contribution to get their code in shape.
Many of the modules that come along have been misguided conceptually,
but I think that e.g. apparmor, tomoyo, smack could use that kind
of constructive help to get into final mergable shape. Personally,
I haven't spent nearly enough time reviewing those, my apologies to
those developers. So, yes, help is welcome.
thanks,
-chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists