Not saying that Apple nor MS haven't had their issues as well, however it has not taken them a month+ to get those services running. Remember is was Linus himself that chose to start calling down others on their security mindedness with his "masturbating monkeys" comments a few years back. It looks like now and only after that they were compromised that security has once again become an issue that requires a bit more attention "then anything else".It's not like the stakes in a complete security audit are an unknown or something. It's an apples to oranges comparison if their scenario is anything but "someone with commit access to our operating system was social-engineered into compromised credentials and may have inserted malignant code", and in the first place neither Apple nor MS have a sterling record they can boast in contrast (and don't think they don't know it)
It could have been just as easy to get that information had such information been present.If they (any of them) somehow managed to...say, lose tens of millions of users' personal information (i.e. "Pull a Sony") I'd be all for laying into them, but that's not the scenario.
They could have just as easily addressed the immediate issue and kept going with the old system until the replacement was ready.Taking time and being careful while still developing the kernel? That earns my respect. From where I sit, their response was actually pretty on the ball, and it'll be relatively simple to turn git into the star of this show when it's all done.
It is more than just embarrassing. Also a lot of people said that there was no danger anyway since the linux kernel sources are managed via git. Yeah but these people obviously forgot that kernel.org was also hosting packages for at least Arch Linux.
It is like saying people would be hypocritical to be more concerned about a fire at huge apartment complex with hundreds of apartments than one at a single-family home. The potential impact of one is much greater than the other, even though both are bad.
Summary: deanjo is disappointed that there hasn't been a big backlash due to the lenghty downtime of linux.org. As a bsd proponent he has a dislike for Linux and perhaps more towards Linus due to a (admittedly shitty) remark where bsd developers where compared to masturbating monkeys. As such he wants this breach to reflect as badly as possible on Linux as a whole. *yawn* more bsd<->linux zelot mudslinging...
It has nothing to do with free vs closed, os vs os, it does however have everything to do with being prepared and not letting "bush league" administration practices effect public perception by any for/against faction. It's just bad administration and deployment, period.As a bsd proponent he has a dislike for Linux and perhaps more towards Linus due to a (admittedly shitty) remark where bsd developers where compared to masturbating monkeys. As such he wants this breach to reflect as badly as possible on Linux as a whole. *yawn* more bsd<->linux zelot mudslinging...
It's obvious this is a disaster for Linux and must be a lesson for Linux Foundation and the community itself. Anyway, Linux ecosystem has a long Nietzschean-like way: Which does not kill Linux, makes it stronger.
- One of the big things was the BitKeeper controversy, this resulted in Git.
- The SCO controversy implied to different parties like Novell, IBM, Red Hat, Linux and others. Finally the copyrights got resolved and Novell was the one owning the UNIX copyrights, that is positive because (still) being a Linux-based company.
So I think this will result in something to manage Linux Foundation's services in a lot more professional way and also a motivation to innovate in them.