From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCDD5DDC for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 08:45:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81E698D for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 08:45:39 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 10:45:36 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Eduardo Valentin Message-ID: <20180911084536.GB23570@kroah.com> References: <20180906225531.GB2251@localhost.localdomain> <20180910232652.GC1764@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180910232652.GC1764@localhost.localdomain> Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Handling of embargoed security issues List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 04:26:53PM -0700, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > Hello Geert, > > On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 10:21:15AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > Hi Eduardo, > > > > On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 12:55 AM Eduardo Valentin wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 09:18:07PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > > Honestly, the fact that somehow the community managed to make this to > > > stable (and eventually to distros) is really good. Imagine for a second > > > a world in which these made only mainline and no stable branch.. > > > > It could have been the disaster needed to trigger a paradigm shift in the > > software industry? > > Well yeah. Just to clarify, what I meant is that the community did a > really great job handling the event, despite the fact that we could have > dont better. What do you feel we could have done "better" given the constraints placed on us? thanks, greg k-h