On Wed, 07 Dec 2011 15:25:18 -0800
Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Well, yes, but only because you shifted the entire terms of the thread
without telling anyone else. All of the above - about how the idea was
to build packages with untrusted build dependencies in trustworthy
places - may have been perfectly clear _to you_, but it was not the
idea that started this thread. This thread was specifically about
creating a 'cloud', containing random contributor's machines, for
doing builds, and several people suggested that might be 'safe' for
scratch builds but not for 'release' builds.
I didn't shift the terms. I've been consistent. Random machine
instances from volunteers are a non-starter.
You seem to have changed the terms of debate rather considerably
with
your _own_ idea, which you introduced into the thread, but which
clearly was not actually very similar at all to the idea of the
person who actually started the thread, Denis Arnaud. The extent of
the difference between what _he_ was thinking/talking about and what
_you_ are thinking/talking about has only been made clear in this
last post of yours.
I answered Denis immediately at the first post and he concurred it was
a problem. I like to think the conversation evolved as we discussed.
The other thing that's confusing is your use of
'wherever' and
'anywhere' when talking about where the builds take place:
"ec2 or rax or wherever"
"scratch or personal chainbuilds could be built in ec2 or rax or
anywhere w/o an issue"
ec2 or rax, I'm fine with. 'anywhere' or
'wherever', I'm not fine
with. I'm guessing, now you've explained things a bit better, that by
'anywhere' or 'wherever' you really mean 'in any reasonably
trustworthy cloud', but that's not what you actually _said_, nor was
that meaning particularly apparent.
I actually said in any cloud instance where you have a contractual
(read financial) relationship. I made that pretty clear.
-sv