Re: [tor-dev] [tor-commits] [tor/master] Clarify who learns about ContactInfo.

[Nick Mathewson <nickm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Karsten Loesing <karsten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10/9/13 4:45 PM, Nick Mathewson wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Roger Dingledine <arma@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 01:45:26PM +0000, nickm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 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
tor-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev