On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 3:24 PM, David Holland <dholland-t...@netbsd.org> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 01:54:49PM -0400, Elad Efrat wrote: >> Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: >>> If not, I don't think this adds any benefit to your proposal and is likely >>> to simply be a distraction; I'd urge you in that case to drop it. >> >> Strongly seconded. There are so many great ways to improve NetBSD and >> wasting time and money on fuzzing is about as suboptimal as it gets. > > Um. > > First of all, that's not what Thor said;
Sorry? Are you saying that me agreeing with Thor that unless this proposal shows some clear advantage over what we already have -- specifically Coverity Scan -- it should probably be dropped is not what Thor said? > second of all, you really > should not be telling potential gsoc students that their project ideas > are flatly worthless, even if your judgment were correct; I said exactly what I think and I'll repeat it again: there are many ways to improve NetBSD. Wasting both time and money, even if it's someone else's, on things that aren't likely to benefit NetBSD in the long term is a waste. There's a list of projects NetBSD's interested in, and when someone proposes a project not on the list it should be reviewed. What I said is my opinion. I don't decide which projects are selected, nor do I participate or plan to participate; it's an honest, objective opinion. > and third, > I'm rather surprised that anyone who claims to work on security would > call testing and analysis tools worthless. I don't *claim* anything, David; I *work*, at least as opposed to, say, assigning bugs to me, claiming for years I'll do something about them (together with many other grand ideas) and instead fix, I dunno, whitespace and grammar issues. Take your preaching elsewhere; I couldn't care less. As for the issue at hand, well, I suggest you look at what the proposal is, what we already have for years, and draw your own conclusions. -e.