diff options
| author | Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> | 2013-12-08 12:39:02 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2013-12-08 12:39:12 +0000 |
| commit | ebd168a536276362ff4f4eaae5687b8f03b7fbfb (patch) | |
| tree | 818216c13159dd3f61a24cced19ee99df2f65f1d | |
| parent | 8de4b9ec659766500af42953b747a02102607baa (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-ebd168a536276362ff4f4eaae5687b8f03b7fbfb.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-ebd168a536276362ff4f4eaae5687b8f03b7fbfb.zip | |
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org, your thoughts?
| -rw-r--r-- | be/f71a1ad31ad2d4191e767ca2e4a7d207604afd | 71 |
1 files changed, 71 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/be/f71a1ad31ad2d4191e767ca2e4a7d207604afd b/be/f71a1ad31ad2d4191e767ca2e4a7d207604afd new file mode 100644 index 000000000..35c271e41 --- /dev/null +++ b/be/f71a1ad31ad2d4191e767ca2e4a7d207604afd @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] + helo=mx.sourceforge.net) + by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1Vpddg-00052U-QF + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Sun, 08 Dec 2013 12:39:12 +0000 +X-ACL-Warn: +Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([192.3.11.21]) + by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + id 1Vpddf-0006XI-LV for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Sun, 08 Dec 2013 12:39:12 +0000 +Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown + [IPv6:2001:470:5:265:be5f:f4ff:febf:4f76]) + (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) + by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7582510803C0; + Sun, 8 Dec 2013 12:39:18 +0000 (UTC) +From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org> +To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 12:39:02 +0000 +User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.1-gentoo; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; ) +References: <52A3C8A5.7010606@gmail.com> + <1795f3067ba3fcdd0caf978cc59ff024.squirrel@fruiteater.riseup.net> + <CANAnSg1DiPLqAGW=2Q0zoLjupn8wvYuhhH8HgvBM0d=5uKJNXA@mail.gmail.com> +In-Reply-To: <CANAnSg1DiPLqAGW=2Q0zoLjupn8wvYuhhH8HgvBM0d=5uKJNXA@mail.gmail.com> +X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F +X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F +X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: Text/Plain; + charset="iso-8859-15" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Message-Id: <201312081239.03166.luke@dashjr.org> +X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) +X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. + See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. + 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. + See + http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block + for more information. [URIs: github.com] + -0.1 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay + domain +X-Headers-End: 1Vpddf-0006XI-LV +Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org, + your thoughts? +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 +Precedence: list +List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2013 12:39:13 -0000 + +On Sunday, December 08, 2013 10:00:35 AM Drak wrote: +> Also it's about time we hosted the Bitcoin Qt software at Github. They have +> a releases feature where you can upload a packaged release (see +> https://github.com/blog/1547-release-your-software). There are also no +> adverts (another privacy leak at the least) and many feel are more +> trustworthy than Sourceforge: it also makes sense to have the downloads +> where the source is developed. + +I'm not aware of any rational basis for trusting GitHub more than SourceForge. +At least SourceForge is transparent and releases their source code. + +Luke + + |