On Thu Feb 21 19, James Morris wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2019, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> being cc'd to linux-security-module? Looking back at
> recent patches, it looked like it was a general request.
> If it is, I'll be more likely to remember if get_maintainers.pl
> brings it up. :)
I'm all open here. Not sure which practices apply to IMA. I kind of tend
to dilate to question does it make sense to CC to LSM for two reasons:
1. I think the original reason was that tpmdd mailing list was small.
Now with the new linux-integrity mailing list up and running there is
more eyes looking at the code. And more importantly the people are
subscribed who use TPM for something, like IMA developers.
2. I don't remember ever reading within the time that I've been
maintaining even a single comment from anyone that works with LSM's. The
value of CC'ing there is not very significant, which means that most of
the time the TPM traffic is just noise on that list.
Sounds about right, there used to be more security folk on LSM and not as
many on the TPM list, but the new integrity list works well for TPM now.
--
James Morris
<jmor...@namei.org>
Okay. Ignore this patch then.
