On 12/27/25 15:05, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
Well said. RMS has even asked to _not_ put pressure on those managing
Savannah, because there is no bandwidth to manage Savannah, or hosting
projects on Savannah.
We are constantly asked to not use some services, because it crashes
the beyond old servers.
To be fair, that is a bit of hacker culture well-established enough to
have an entry in the Jargon File:
<URL:https://www.catb.org/jargon/html/D/Don-t-do-that-then-.html>
I also doubt that Savannah user activities could crash even ancient
servers. Now, MACAC activities are a different matter, but I can hardly
blame Savannah for the effects of ongoing DDoS attacks. If anything,
the Savannah admins deserve considerable credit that Savannah is still
up *at* *all*.
Also, please assign blame where it is due: if the Savannah servers are
old, it is most likely because that is the latest hardware that will
actually work with Free boot firmware. FSF is not to blame for that,
rather, the industry (I suspect led/pushed by Intel and ... (who else?)
... Microsoft) is to blame, along with the government for its failure to
enforce the anti-trust laws and break the improper tying of hardware to
firmware [...rant elided...]
-- Jacob
