On Wednesday, April 10, 2013 03:55:46 PM Miloslav Trmač wrote:
the discussion has somewhat died down... If you have a specific proposal
for a change in policy, please add it to
; hard data that demonstrate the
impact, if any, in a situation relevant to Fedora (in particular, taking
into account prelink as it is deployed by default) would be very welcome
but is not a strict requirement.
(This is not intended to cut off the discussion on the mailing list, only
to make it clear to FESCo whether there is any proposal for change or
whether we are happy enough with the current status.)
I don't think there is any need to extend the set of packages that _should_
get hardening. The current guidelines are sufficient. What is not happening is
the packages that have apps that fit the need to be hardened are not getting
the proper hardening. I have opened dozens of bugs on the "core" packages that
matter, but even those bz are still not complete.
Bottom line, we just need more prodding of maintainers that have apps that
need hardening based on current guidelines.