Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] Miscellaneous and documentation: Only use TLS-protected transports

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 8:59 PM Demi Marie Obenour <demi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Obtaining code over an insecure transport is a terrible idea for
blatently obvious reasons.  Even for non-executable data, insecure
transports are considered deprecated.

This patch changes miscellaneous links that are not used by any
automated tool.  Some of these links are dead anyway.

As I said in response to patch 4, I appreciate the goal and the effort here.  But I'd rather not replace a working link with a broken link, or a broken link with another broken link.

If we want to make this change, I think we're going to have to be creative with how the link replacement is done, as well as in how it's demonstrated to reviewers that the new URLs are valid.

One option, for instance, could be writing a small script that would check the link validity first and only make the change if the link was valid; and then including that script in the commit message.  The reviewer could then convince themselves that the script was correct, and give an Ack or R-b on that basis.  There are probably other ideas as well.  

Any thoughts?

 -George