_____
From: clamav-users [mailto:clamav-users-boun...@lists.clamav.net] On Behalf Of Joel Esler (jesler) via clamav-users Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 11:22 AM To: ClamAV users ML Cc: Joel Esler (jesler) Subject: Re: [clamav-users] ClamAVR blog: ClamAV 0.104.0 Release Candidate is here! On Jul 28, 2021, at 7:17 AM, Rick Cooper <rcoo...@dwford.com> wrote: total disregard for the user base, not so much as a poll or query on the lists, enjoy your new cutting edge toys Corporate BS rears it's ugly head again, First snort, then centos and now clamav. I think this is unfair. This is the feedback we're getting. Sounds like we don't need a poll or a query. We're hearing it now. Actually the way it was presented was here is what's going to happen and not what would the community think about going to cmake, here are the advantages to the community if we go this way. It wasn't presented as an option and it took a lot of people off guard. It's like someone on the list said if you are using an old stable enterprise version maybe you just need to switch to something more cutting edge like Fedora, which is not stable and shouldn't be used in an enterprise situation. When I upgrade an OS it's a very big deal because I have to template it, use it in production at one of the sites to make sure everything is stable, keep it out of the other upgrade paths (the older OS's) and image it, go to several (100+es each) cities on a Sunday (to be at console and cannot take it down any other day) and then update the site specific pieces, test everything and drive 100+ back. What might be a small thing for some is a real life's mess for many others. I didn't mean to be as offensive as it came out but I was pissed because for my mail servers it's going to be a problem, I've built it on a file server (Centos 7) alright but just to get to correct version of cmake built and all the required dependencies was cumbersome at best. I also think it's unfair to think "big bad Cisco" had anything to do with this at all. ClamAV is beholden to Cisco in very few ways. In that it's integrated i nto a few products, other than that, the ClamAV development team has pretty full autonomy. No one is coming down to Micah and saying "YOU MUST YOU CMAKE YOU PEON DEVELOPER MUHAHAHAHAHA". That was , in fact, unfair of me. Perhaps the team isn't part of the culture. I have had issue with Cisco for quite some time, really going back to when they bought Linksys because their hardware was over priced and more and more enterprises was realizing the didn't to pay Cisco for a name... rather than simply build a reasonable priced series of equipment (as they do today) they bought a reasonably prices equipment vendor. If you have feedback, this is the perfect use of this list to do so, but we're also all adults, with jobs, with passions, and we can be professional. As far as Snort, I think the same logic applies. The rewrite of Snort started long before Cisco even entered the picture, it started when we were still Sourcefire back in 2011-2012. I have the engineering slides! I'd have to think about it, I thought the paid sigs over community sigs began with Cisco but maybe it was Sourcefire. I am sure you are right it's my bad attitude about Cisco, I am waiting for them to purchase ubiquiti next. and the entire IBM Centos mess just turns up my "big company" hackles.
_______________________________________________ clamav-users mailing list clamav-users@lists.clamav.net https://lists.clamav.net/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: https://github.com/vrtadmin/clamav-faq http://www.clamav.net/contact.html#ml
