On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Karsten Loesing <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/9/13 4:45 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Roger Dingledine <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 01:45:26PM +0000, [email protected] wrote: >>>> diff --git a/src/config/torrc.sample.in b/src/config/torrc.sample.in >>>> index c667efc..78013c2 100644 >>>> --- a/src/config/torrc.sample.in >>>> +++ b/src/config/torrc.sample.in >>>> @@ -120,9 +120,12 @@ >>>> ## is per month) >>>> #AccountingStart month 3 15:00 >>>> >>>> -## Contact info to be published in the directory, so we can contact you >>>> -## if your relay is misconfigured or something else goes wrong. Google >>>> -## indexes this, so spammers might also collect it. >>>> +## Administrative contact information for this relay or bridge. This line >>>> +## can be used to contact you if your relay or bridge is misconfigured or >>>> +## something else goes wrong. Note that we archive and publish all >>>> +## descriptors containing these lines and that Google indexes them, so >>>> +## spammers might also collect them. You may want to obscure the fact that >>>> +## it's an email address and/or generate a new address for this purpose. >>>> #ContactInfo Random Person <nobody AT example dot com> >>>> ## You might also include your PGP or GPG fingerprint if you have one: >>>> #ContactInfo 0xFFFFFFFF Random Person <nobody AT example dot com> >>> >>> Hi Nick, Karsten, >>> >>> You've just changed the torrc.sample.in file, which will cause everybody >>> who uses the deb and upgrades from Tor 0.2.4.17-rc to have to manually >>> evaluate/adjust/replace their /etc/tor/torrc file. >>> >>> Are you sure you want to do this? >>> >>> It's not the end of the world here since the torrc.sample was last >>> updated for Tor 0.2.4.3-alpha, so people upgrading from 0.2.3.x debs >>> will already be affected. >>> >>> But I wonder if it's really worth hassling every deb user who will >>> be upgrading from 0.2.4.x? >>> >>> In any case we should update the >>> ## Last updated 12 September 2012 for Tor 0.2.4.3-alpha. >>> line at the top of the file, so we can accurately predict who will be >>> affected by changes like this in the future. >> >> I'm fine either way, up to and including reverting the change for >> 0.2.4 and keeping it in 0.2.5. >> >> What do you think, Karsten? > > Oh! Probably not worth hassling 0.2.4 deb users. It looks like many > people upgraded to 0.2.4.17-rc in September. There are about 1000 of > 4400 relays running 0.2.4 these days [0]. > > How about we partially a) revert the change to torrc.sample.in for 0.2.4 > (the man page change can stay, right?) and b) update the "Last updated" > part in the 0.2.5 torrc.sample.in? > > Nick, please find > https://gitweb.torproject.org/karsten/tor.git/shortlog/refs/heads/task-9854-2 > for the change in b). I'm not entirely sure how to do the change in a) > without messing up your backporting logic.
Merging b. To do a, I did: 541 cd src/tor-024 545 git revert --no-commit 66a04a6ac334775dc396025e0c15fa49eca138a7 549 git reset doc/tor.1.txt 551 git checkout doc/tor.1.txt 554 git revert --continue 556 git push 557 cd ../tor 562 git log master..origin/maint-0.2.4 565 git merge -s ours origin/maint-0.2.4 566 git push (The omitted commands are obsessive "git status" invocations, and screw-ups.) _______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
