boklm

From what I see, shout-irc does not allow you to stay connected on IRC channels when you are offline or close your browser.

You can try the following workaround: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/17453#commen...

This link has already been posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10107833

No, journald has its own benefits. Creating an alternative to some software doesn't mean you have ill will towards it.

systemd is 100% free software, unlink Windows. systemd has a command line interface unlike most Windows tools. And I don't know what is the Windows init system but I doubt it is similar to systemd. It's probably much closer to the Mac OS X init than Windows'.

Seriously, it does not make any sense to say that systemd is a "Windows" approach.

An article in Spanish: http://www.eldiario.es/turing/vigilancia_y_privacidad/dispos...

An other article, this one in spanish: http://www.eldiario.es/turing/vigilancia_y_privacidad/dispos...

Correction on the title: this activist is a girl, so it should say "on on her car", not his.

Because the clients need to get the list of nodes from somewhere.

You can read more about how this works at this URL: https://gitweb.torproject.org/torspec.git/tree/dir-spec.txt

This exit node is now flagged as BadExit: https://atlas.torproject.org/#details/8361A794DFA231D863E109...

Blaming the VCS that much is a bunch of lazy excuses.

I'm not blaming CVS as an excuse, because as I said, I didn't plan to review it anyway.

No it doesn't make code review difficult.

It does make code review difficult, for all the reasons I gave. And I've seen several people who try review it complain about that too.

I somehow can't imagine an organization named "Linux Foundation" to give money to OpenBSD and other non-Linux related open source projects.

Why not ? I could imagine them giving money to OpenSSH developers at least, seeing how it is part of the core infrastructure.

Also, would you have imagined Microsoft giving money to an organization named "Linux Foundation" ?

Basically, I don't see any reason to question their use of CVS.

Why not ?

With CVS, the security rely on the security of a single server. Anybody with root access to the CVS server can modify history, and nobody would notice.

There's many problems that makes it very annoying to review their changes:

- CVS commits are per file. You can't see changes made by a single commit to multiple files.

- CVS cannot rename files. You have to create a new file and remove the old one. So you cannot follow history of the changes.

- CVS is really slow. You cannot clone the repository locally, so it takes a few seconds to show any change, whereas git shows you any commit and logs instantly. And you can't do it offline (for instance if you need to spend a few hours in a train).

- git log / show / diff is so much better than cvs log / diff.

- you can't use things like git blame

- they've lost all openssl.org history. If they were using git, they could have cloned the openssl git repository, and add their commits on top, keeping all history (which is often very useful when you're trying to understand why something has been done like this, or who introduced some change).

I'm not an openssl expert, so I didn't plan to review their changes anyway. But if I had to, using CVS would be the most annoying thing.

Because people might be interested to review their changes, and CVS makes that very difficult.

It's not telling. Whether what you say is true or not, in either case it would be risky to attach your name to something like this.

It's used for more than git-svn: git-add--interactive.perl git-cvsexportcommit.perl git-cvsserver.perl git-relink.perl git-svn.perl git-archimport.perl git-cvsimport.perl git-difftool.perl git-send-email.perl

There is actually more lines of perl than shell if we exclude tests:

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Language                     files          blank        comment           code
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  C                              340          20596          18649         135900
  Perl                            43           4698           4310          27503
  Bourne Shell                    77           2523           1843          18766
  C/C++ Header                   140           2636           4635          11132
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  SUM:                           600          30453          29437         193301
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Language                     files          blank        comment           code
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  C                              341          20602          18656         135910
  Bourne Shell                   761          21736           6908         124222
  Perl                            47           4728           4325          27739
  C/C++ Header                   140           2636           4635          11132
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  SUM:                          1289          49702          34524         299003
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About Tor in china: https://blog.torproject.org/blog/how-to-read-our-china-usage...

Messages are encrypted using AES and BLOWFISH ciphers on the way into the database.

Using a key that is stored in the same database ? How is that useful ?

IPs and logs aren't stored.

Except when they decide they want to keep logs.