On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > You are, and that was being very un-excellent, so please refrain from it > in future. I'm left wondering where your concern about being excellent to each other has been hiding throughout this thread, and where it was when you made the "Your Majesty" comment to Jay Sulzberger moments after this post. > It is never a good idea to assume malice where you can't prove it. This sounds like a guilty conscience speaking to me. I never claimed any malice. I apologize if my message sounded as though I were. Let me make this more clear: People in this thread have been saying that instructions can't be created because the hardware is not available to the public yet. However, the people working this stuff actually do have access to UEFI secureboot hardware. I presumed this was under NDA, because none of them were stepping up to say "no, actually I do have the hardware". The idea that the firmware is complete enough to build and test the cryptographic lockdown but not complete enough to make write instructions against simply didn't occur to me. And with that thought in mind I think it's even more sad that the Fedora community isn't focusing primarily on making instructions _now_ while there may still be an opportunity to encourage making those yet unwritten interfaces easy and consistent. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
