[Discuss] kernel.org

[jonathan at jonmasters.org (Jon Masters)]

On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 11:25 -0400, markw at mohawksoft.com wrote:
> >> From: Jon Masters [mailto:jonathan at jonmasters.org]
> 
> > Nothing against John or Peter, but there's such a thing as change
> > management.  If it was easy to put it back up quickly and safely, but it
> > needs to be overhauled to enhance functionality, then the thing to do is
> > put it back up quickly, and plan the overhaul in such a way that it
> > doesn't entail a month of downtime.

Which would be a better headline?

1). "kernel.org rooted again, lax security blah blah blah. Film at 11!"
2). "kernel.org still down, everyone sucks".

I have to say I favor the latter.

> That is one way to operate, yes. But if the previous implementation was
> suspect, then one MUST assume putting it back up would only restore the
> illicit access as well.
> 
> One of the "anti-business" aspect of open source, is the mentality that
> you'll get it when its ready. For one, like all things, it has pros and
> cons, but sometimes its good.

Actually, it's not even really anti-business. The "pro-business" option
would be what Linux Foundation did in getting their main web site up and
running as a priority prior to linux.com and other secondaries. So, they
might have prioritized the web-facing stuff but kernel.org isn't really
in the business of marketing and PR (beyond when this stuff happens), so
it's not so much "anti-business" as not really having a position.

Jon.