On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 01:35:24PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
#681721 looks like a duplicate of the bug report I filed earlier
#632438. I've manually solved this on my own systems by modifying the
popcon cron job to remove sensitive packages from the output. In #632438
I mentioned a few ideas
On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 14:34 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
Well, I am not sure I like the idea to help users to remove packages from the
list. If you are afraid to leak information, the only safe course is not to
report to popcon. I do not want popcon to be held responsible for leaking
On Sun, May 05, 2013 at 08:49:02PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 14:34 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
Well, I am not sure I like the idea to help users to remove packages from
the
list. If you are afraid to leak information, the only safe course is not to
report to
On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 15:00 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
What kind of metapackages ?
The usual:
organisation-site-purpose
For example:
google-nycdc-crawler
amazon-sydney-ec2storagenode
Maybe such packages could have a control field 'X-Popcon-report: no' that
would prevent
popcon from
On Sun, May 05, 2013 at 09:21:54PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
On Sun, 2013-05-05 at 15:00 +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
What kind of metapackages ?
The usual:
organisation-site-purpose
For example:
google-nycdc-crawler
amazon-sydney-ec2storagenode
Who create them ? What information
#681721 looks like a duplicate of the bug report I filed earlier
#632438. I've manually solved this on my own systems by modifying the
popcon cron job to remove sensitive packages from the output. In #632438
I mentioned a few ideas that could be used to exclude packages.
--
bye,
pabs
6 matches
Mail list logo
