From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Network security manager Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 08:56:34 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87wq6uj5gt.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416232614 17987 80.91.229.3 (17 Nov 2014 13:56:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 13:56:54 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 17 14:56:47 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XqMnO-0004lv-P6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 14:56:46 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48022 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqMnO-0002lU-Fq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 08:56:46 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59856) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqMn4-0002l9-Nd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 08:56:33 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqMmx-0003ZU-P3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 08:56:26 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:48828) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqMmx-0003Z7-Jj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 08:56:19 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XqMmw-0004Wt-8p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 14:56:18 +0100 Original-Received: from c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([98.229.61.72]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 14:56:18 +0100 Original-Received: from tzz by c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2014 14:56:18 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 23 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.130012 (Ma Gnus v0.12) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:E66jzNzfSLgMFyOKAAPaSuLwt8w= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:177403 Archived-At: On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 13:46:59 +0100 Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote: LMI> I plan on starting to implement the Emacs network security manager soon LMI> (hopefully this evening), but I was wondering whether to do it on a LMI> public feature branch or on the trunk. LMI> Doing it on a branch will make it less likely that I'll be disrupting LMI> much, but (by experience) this also means that there will be no testing LMI> or feedback by anybody else but me until I merge the entire thing. LMI> If I'm implementing this directly on the trunk, it will be disabled by LMI> default, and the people who want to test it will have to set a variable LMI> called something like `network-security-policy' to something like LMI> `enabled'. The default will be nil, so (in theory) nobody else should LMI> be bothered by it while we're working out the details. Feature branch or emacs-24 please. It should be applicable to emacs-24, and the maintainers have requested we work against emacs-24 in those cases, forward-porting the changes into master. I'll be testing it with you. Ted