On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 03:04:06PM +0100, Tomas Hozza wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 02:59:18PM +0100, Tomas Hozza wrote: > > >> I agree with Lennart. Whether or not this is expected to work with > > >> DNSSEC is of academic interest given that people will expect it to work > > >> with _their computers_, regardless of what they're running. > > > I guess next time I'll not send thing to devel list that I don't want > > > to be picked on. This is completely out of context. > > Am I misunderstanding something? It seems like a valid concern to me. > Besides that my email started with the fact that it is what it is, whether > you like it or not, I continued with the possibilities we have. I read your whole post. Those possibilities seem pretty limited, from the point of view of serious regressions in Fedora usability. It isn't that I "like" Fedora being less than technically correct (especially around security-related features), but I don't think we can discount the prevalence of "broken" schemes in the real world. > I took this conversation as a mean for improvement. But it turned out > to be PR for systemd-resolved. I don't really care about that. I care that we pick the solutions that are best for our users. -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
