Hi,
intrigeri wrote (13 May 2013 15:42:10 GMT) :
> I've tried it, and it works fine for me (and makes "the boot device
> has safe access rights" test pass), so I've merged our feature/bilibop
> branch into the experimental one.
> I'd like to fix this bug for 0.18.1 or 0.19.
> So, the question now is: do we want to use bilibop to fix this serious
> bug, or develop and maintain a in-house solution?
> A. bilibop
> pros:
> - already works in a way that I'd be happy to ship in our next
> stable release
> - we don't have tomaintain it: quidame does
> - it supports more hardware / boot media / installation modes
> than we'll ever do ourselves
> cons:
> - we (well, I) have to sponsor it in Debian
> - quite a lot of code for something that may look simple
> B. home-made solution
> pros:
> - less code
> cons:
> - the code is not finished (yet)
> - we have to maintain it ourselves
> - only supports the hardware / boot media / installation modes
> that we explicitly add support for
> I do prefer to go with plan A.
> What do others think?
Nobody disagreed, so this is now a formal review&merge request.
Now is more than time to voice your opinion if you disagree with us
going the bilibop way.
feature/bilibop has been in experimental for two weeks.
I've just updated the ticket (todo/make_system_disk_read-only) to make
the next steps clearer.
Candidate for 0.19, please merge into devel (at the APT level too).
> quidame, would you be happy to commit to make bilibop-udev support the
> Tails usecase on the long term? (that is, Debian stable + live-build +
> live-boot, GPT, DVD or USB / sd-card, etc.)
FTR, quidame commits to do so :)
Cheers,
--
intrigeri
| GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc
| OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc
