On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:03:27 -0300, Leonardo Rodrigues <[email protected]> articulated:
> this is the first time, in SEVERAL years that i work with IT, > that i've seen a software publisher pushing a 'kill' signature to its > own software. Could you please qualify that statement. Do you mean that this is the first instance of this kind you have experienced in several years, meaning of course that there is a precedence for it, or that it is the fist time in the several years you have worked at your profession that you have observed this behavior? Your statement, as it now stands, is ambiguous. > it's VERY common in the software industry to stop supporting old > versions, but they simply stay working. They're outdated, > unsupported, but they keep working. I have a working Redhat 9 machine > running until today, despite the fact it's SEVERAL years unsupported > and deprecated. Is this the best thing to do ? No, absolutely not, i > dont want credits for that. But hey, it simply continue working. Many of use have taken that route as a 'stop gap' measure. However, to instigate it as an official protocol is just asking for trouble. (Reread this thread for further details) > clamav took a VERY bad move, there's absolutely no doubt on > that. This will surely affect the software credibility, as you can be > sure that LOTS and LOTS of email servers are broken since the > signature was published. Whether or not they make a bad decision is your unqualified opinion. In addition, would you please be so kind as to qualify the "LOTS and LOTS" with some actual documentation. > despite the fact there's was good reasons for doing that, it WAS > a VERY bad move IMHO. That statement is diabolically opposed to itself, although you did qualify it with a "IMHO" disclaimer. The bottom line is you did not pay for or (to the best of my knowledge) develop this software. You have no standing on the matter of how the ClamAV team distributes it product. The ClamAV team choose to take the advice of Ricky Nelson, "You can't please everyone so you have got to please yourself." Now that is the bottom line. -- Jerry [email protected] Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________ The first guy that rats gets a bellyful of slugs in the head. Understand? Joey Glimco, trade unionist _______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
