Re: [RFC][PATCH] (#4) auditfs

On Thu, 2005-02-24 at 12:13 -0600, Timothy R. Chavez wrote: >I'd like to start getting feedback on linux-fsdevel with a CC directly >to Al Viro about the design itself. What do you all think of this >approach? Or perhaps I should bring it directly to LKML? Should I >wait until the intermediary patch #5 is completed and tested before I >start any dialog? I personally think overlapping the two would be >fine. The reason I think this is because the first major stumbling >block has nothing to do with the implementation itself, but the design >and all the philosophy and politics surrounding it. As soon as I >mention "filesystem auditing" I've noticed that people get antsy and >immediately try to beat it down like a pianta made out of software >patents J/K. Thus I feel a large part of this endeveour is going to >revolve around explanation. Do you agree? I'd appreciate some >feedback. I agree. Take it to linux-fsdevel. Outline the design and the reason for it, and show that you're keeping it as unintrusive as it can be. I don't think you have to have a complete and perfect implementation before you do so, as long as you don't present your patch as such. There's not a lot of point in completely finishing it before we show anything, if we're going to have to make significant changes.

-- dwmw2 -- Linux-audit mailing list Linux-audit(a)redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit