cvs commit: www/en/marketing os-comparison.sgml

[Murray Stokely]

On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 05:08:56PM +0200, Remko Lodder wrote:
> >>This update disturbs me.  By mentioning CERT advisories without an OS
> >>separation gives me the feeling that the document is missing its
> >>objective.  Why not just give a link to CERT advisories list then?
> >>The previous "CERT Advisories in 2000 that affected Linux" and "CERT
> >>Advisories in 2000 that affected Windows" parts were an interesting
> >>advocacy argument.  I don't think phpBB or Oracle vulns well push people
> >>to use FreeBSD, etc.
> >
> >
> >Yes, I agree that a full list of CERT advisories of the last year is
> >less useful than the several years old breakdown of CERT advisories
> >grouped by affected operating system.
> >
> >Also, surely such information is provided via XML somewhere and so if
> >it was desired it should be automatically syndicated, not copied in to
> >this document manually.
> >
> >     - Murray
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Feel free to adjust it to better needs. I am not really into advocacy
> and stuff, just did what the PR asked us to do :-).

Many PRs are better just closed than patched.  

Can you back it out and point out to the submitter that the whole
point is in the OS comparison article is to show how FreeBSD is (or at
least was several years ago when I wrote it) affected by far fewer
CERT advisories than Windows or Red Hat Linux?

If you don't want to do this, maybe have the submitter go through the
advisories and group them by effected OS as before?

	- Murray