Re: breaking out: thinking abt the 'sa-update *VS* rdj' thread .. .

[Richard <op...@gmail.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

hi chris,

Chris Santerre wrote, On 8/11/06 9:26 AM:
>> from a user's perspective, all this is confusing/confounding.  as a
>> user, i want to see/use one mechanism for rules.
>
> From an SA admin, it makes perfect sense. :)

well, given that i'm admin numerous SA-installs as well, and was simply
opining as a user, i'll politely & adamantly disagree with you :-)

and, it would seem, both some other admins and sa-devs do as well ... to
be fair, others agree with you.

>> currently, it all "smells" like a bunch o' (talented & well-meaning)
>> engineers discussing how NOT to do things, and WHETHER to do things.
>> and, a fair dosage of 'project pride' mixed in ...
>
> A little from column A and B.  But there are some good reasons to why they
> are seperate.

i'm not arguing the reasons.  i'm opining about the (my) end-users
perspective.

since i'm 'spending' my $0.01 anyway, that opinion is (where ARE those
asbestos shorts ?!) that "i don't care about the reasons".

>> iiuc, SARE, & eventually RDJ, were created a while ago because,
>> historically , releasing new sa-project rules
>>
>
> You kind of trailed off there :)

(damn copy-n-paste ...)

	> "... releasing new sa-project rules" ...

	... required an SA-code release which was an unacceptably slow process

>> quite clearly, with the advent of SA-project released/blessed
>> sa-update,
>> it's not really necessary anymore.  i.e., asynchronous rule & code
>> releases are provided for.
>
> Ok, no. SARE and the official SA are worlds apart. SARE has been setup
to be
> QUICK and accurate. SA is accurate. SARE wants to get good rules out when
> they are needed. Now saupdate make the DELIVERY of that possible.

fine. point made re: the CREATION of rules.

i agree that multiples sources of rules are a good thing ... just like
multiple DNSBL/RBS sources are.

but, using that example, there's a "standard way" for getting at those
multiple sources ... THAT's what i think needs to be fixed here.

to your point, it's abt the delivery.

> But the creation of rules in the official method of SA is... please
pardon me... a
> clusterfsck!

if true -- and i'll assume so for the sake of discussion here -- then,
in the immortal words of "Tim Gunn", then collaborate & "Make it work!"

> And the apache lic is like reading the fine print on a life insurance
> policy. I've looked into what it would take to make SARE a part of SA
> officialy. Yeah, I'll pass.

from your perspective, certainly valid.

from a user's, again - don't care.

> The ability for SARE to get good rules out fast is why it is there.

<snip>

again, not arguing about an asynchronously developed, fast & accurate,
*source* of rules.  the more the merrier.

i'm ranting about the functional "getting them" part.

thanks for the comments!



- --

/"\
\ /  ASCII Ribbon Campaign
 X   against HTML email, vCards
/ \  & micro$oft attachments

[GPG] OpenMacNews at gmail dot com
fingerprint: 50C9 1C46 2F8F DE42 2EDB  D460 95F7 DDBD 3671 08C6
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iEYEAREDAAYFAkTcssoACgkQlffdvTZxCMbuhACdEFDgb+/4gs0Ds/ROT/5tc6S/
rgMAmgPUrKWCqiKxXM5JW5VSHoQM0vXx
=h/Lf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----