linux-kernel - Re: Planned changes for bugzilla.kernel.org to reduce the "Bugzilla blues"

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 3 Oct 2022 07:41:08 +0000
From:   "Artem S. Tashkinov" <aros@....com>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>,
        workflows@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "regressions@...ts.linux.dev" <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
        ksummit@...ts.linux.dev,
        Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
Subject: Re: Planned changes for bugzilla.kernel.org to reduce the "Bugzilla
 blues"



On 10/2/22 23:04, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 02, 2022 at 10:20:40PM +0000, Artem S. Tashkinov wrote:
>
>> Bugzilla hasn't been updated in a very long time so it's missing both
>> mailing lists and individual kernel developers.
>>
>> AFAIK, some pieces of kernel have no appropriate mailing lists at all.
>> What about that? I've no clue.
>
> There's that file, right in the root of the source tree.  Called "MAINTAINERS",
> in all-caps...  Could have something to do with locating maintainers, could it not?
>
>> Opt-in will work, except I've no idea how to make it work. Mass email
>> all the kernel developers and politely invite them to sign up? Most will
>> simply ignore it.
>
> Sigh...   You really don't seem to appreciate just how deep a septic
> tank you've jumped into with your combination of "it should be opt-out"
> and "but unsubscribing takes just a minute, what are you unhappy about?!?"
>
> Maybe you are not using email a lot, but for just about everyone who does...
> We have heard that.  Many, many times.  From many sources - spammers,
> "legitimate" companies' marketing departments, etc.
>
> And you keep moving along the same track - the usual reaction of some
> company after having pulled back a bloody stump and enjoyed the pile of
> explanations of the reasons why opt-out is *NOT* *ACCEPTABLE*, *EVER*
> is along the lines of "OK, we'll just spam everyone in our database once
> and ask them to opt-in - that must be OK, right?"

Being on bugzilla does _not_ mean you'll receive a single email unless
someone _specifically_ CC's you.

(Except for relevant mailing lists and already specified maintainers who
are confirmed to manage certain kernel subsystems).

We've had over40 messages in this conversation and not a single person
has complained about SPAM ever coming from bugzilla.

With what I proposed that would _not_ change.

Weird to read this torrent of hatred and aggression towards purely
imaginary SPAM.

Anyways, Bugzilla is bad but it surely works. Let's have 100+ more
interchanges inventing something most users (for whom Bugzilla exists -
which people here keep forgetting all the time) will a have hard time
working with.

I repeat: Bugzilla exists for end users primarily.

Regards,
Artem