Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 21:16:36 -0500 From: M Farkas-Dyck <strake888@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: New domain! On 18/04/2014, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > I think it's more just a matter of the practical pros and cons, and > one issue is establishing name recognition. musl.libc.org establishes > name recognition for musl and plain libc.org or www.libc.org doesn't. Like kernel.org. I think they at least ought to have registered linux.org too, but meh. > So I'm leaning towards an approach that uses them in conjunction with > musl.libc.org being the musl site and libc.org being something that's > not misrepresented as fully independent of musl, but that's also more > general. This makes sense. > Securing a mail system that > can end up sending outgoing mail is a big deal and really sucks if you > get it wrong (spam liability). I doubt whether it's worth the bother. That said, if you think so, I'd like <strake@...c.org> ☺
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.