Re: GnuTLS for W32

["Óscar Fuentes" <ofv@wanadoo.es>]

Juanma Barranquero <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 02:24, Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es> wrote:
>
>> Please note that notifying the user about security vulnerabilities and
>> critical fixes has nothing to do with the source/binary discussion.
>
> No, but the source/binary discussion is being swept under the carpet
> as if there were nothing to discuss and it was *evident* that we
> should distribute the binaries. Perhaps you have noticed that I
> disagree with that idea.

I have no objections to your disagreement towards this and your POV wrt
the Emacs project distributing binaries. Furthermore, if that's the
sentiment on the rest of the w32 emacs people and the project leaders,
I'll urge you to stop distributing MS Windows binaries. I'm pretty sure
that there will be no shortage of Emacs binaries for MS Windows.

>> Even
>> on a source-only world, it is a nice (maybe the correct word nowadays
>> would be "required") service to users to proactively inform them.
>
> Yes. And I bet that in most source-only projects, like Emacs, the
> usual way is to put a notice in the project web page, publish an
> announcement in the relevant mailing lists and newsgroups, or send
> people an e-mail if they are subscribed to e-mail notifications.

That's not proactive. I don't periodically visit the project the web
page of all sensitive software I use searching for critical updates, nor
subscribe to mailing lists, e-mail notifications (is there one for
Emacs?) nor read newsgroups. That's totally unrealistic as it would take
lots of time. Really, I can't see how you object to automatic checks for
critical updates. Even less can I understand how you object to that
feature in principle, not just as personal preference.

[snip]