Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Default version for star-merge (and more)

[Tom Lord]

    > From: Ron Parker <address@hidden>

    > I vaguely recall someone requesting aliases stored in {arch} at one
    > point and I would be against that (at least in naive form). It could
    > limit competition and create some form of central authority. 

It would not create a central authority, not even close.   It would
create project defaults that are easier to accept (or, to override in
a fork) -- and those are good things.

    > Even worse there would be the potential for a foreign changeset
    > to redirect the alias to a different archive, which I would
    > consider somewhat of a security issue, cf.
    > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-arch-users/2004-03/msg00954.html
    > for Tom's perspective on central authorities.

How is that different from a foreign changset that installs malicious
code in my tree?  Yes, you have to be careful what changes you accept
into your trees.

What I don't like (mostly) is central authority lock-in (and thus
contention for who gets to run the central authority).  We have one of
those, DNS, and that's plenty.  What I do like are tools that allow
any one trust group to organize themselves assuming that trust.

-t