On 2/23/2010 10:29 AM, Mark Pottorff wrote:
> I wasn't aware that the BOINC project team feels it is necessary to define 
> what projects should and should not do. I thought it was an open community.

Now, this is just being snarky.

I'm not on the development team, so I'm speaking as an outsider who 
hopes he's contributed a little once in a while.

I expect BOINC to take whatever steps are reasonably available to 
protect my machine from hacking.

That means that project "A" should not be able to run rough-shod across 
my machine.  It should not be able to access files that do not belong to 
project "A" and it should not be able affect how my machine runs.

It's my machine after all -- and my choice.

The rest of the discussion has been to define terms like "project" and 
"account manager" and how, conceptually, they're different.

Sounds like the people most likely to write the code are open to 
extensions to the account manager interface to allow "more management" 
because that fits what an account manager should do.

Not what a project should do, for good or bad.

"Open Source" is not the same as insecure -- and open community is not 
the same as "everything goes."
_______________________________________________
boinc_dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev
To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and
(near bottom of page) enter your email address.

Reply via email to