4 ms·
> You can yank a version, which tells Cargo not to allow any projects to form new dependencies on that version, but the version isn't actually deleted That's h
by waffle_ss 10y ago
> You can yank a version, which tells Cargo not to allow any projects to form new dependencies on that version, but the version isn't actually deleted
That's how RubyGems used to work, except you could contact the support team and ask them to permanently delete your gem version if something really sensitive and irrevocable was put into it. They had to change that due to their support log getting too big: http://blog.rubygems.org/2015/04/13/permadelete-on-yank.html http://blog.rubygems.org/2015/04/13/permadelete-on-yank.html
- kibwen 10y agoAnd of course, a centralized site can still be compelled to remove a package via legal action if push comes to shove.
- eridius 10y agoCargo's policy is that if you upload secrets, you need to change the secrets because the code can't be deleted. From the aforelinked page: > A yank does not delete any code. This feature is not intended for deleting accidentally uploaded secrets, for example. If that happens, you must reset those secrets immediately.
- waffle_ss 10y agoEven if they're given a court order to take a version down? It may be their policy, but I guarantee it will happen at some point.
- steveklabnik 10y agoWe will comply with the law where required.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- dkersten 10y agoCourt orders will be a lot less frequent than normal user requests so the overhead to the team won't be as high.
- waffle_ss 10y agoOf course, and I totally agree with their approach. I'm just saying the narrative eridius is pushing that somehow they can make assurances about things never being deleted totally false. For example, I'm sure if someone somehow put child pornography in a Rust crate it would rightly be taken down pretty fast (and not require a court order). Also I just wanted to give a little history because eridius's original comment made it sound like it was a novel concept.
- cfallin 10y agoThis seems a bit... inflexible. I definitely understand the arguments for not breaking builds and for reducing administrative overhead and such, but not every bit of secret data can be revoked like a key/credential can. What if you accidentally include user data, or proprietary business-logic code, or...? (Yes, with proper data hygiene and processes you'd never even come close to doing any of that, but it seems there should still be an escape hatch.)