[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone
From: |
Zack Weinberg |
Subject: |
Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone |
Date: |
Wed, 03 Dec 2003 09:25:26 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Nathaniel Smith <address@hidden> writes:
> Why are you more worried about DoS directed at a patch database
> submission email than a DoS directed at gcc{,address@hidden
Mainly because the hypothetical patch database would be a new thing,
and people always worry more about new things.
> It seems like the available defenses slightly better in the former
> case (because monotone packets are more recognizable), and the
> annoyance greater in the latter case (where the DoS is reflected to
> everyone).
You're probably right.
zw
- Re: [Monotone-devel] GCC and Monotone, Zack Weinberg, 2003/12/02
- [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone, graydon hoare, 2003/12/02
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone, Zack Weinberg, 2003/12/02
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone, graydon hoare, 2003/12/02
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone, Zack Weinberg, 2003/12/02
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone, graydon hoare, 2003/12/02
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone, Zack Weinberg, 2003/12/02
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone, Nathaniel Smith, 2003/12/03
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone,
Zack Weinberg <=
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone, Tom Tromey, 2003/12/03
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone, Tom Tromey, 2003/12/03
Re: [Monotone-devel] GCC and Monotone, Tom Tromey, 2003/12/03