Re: privoxy, https-everywhere & freedombox

Boruch Baum <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 11/18/2012 12:12 PM, David Schmidt wrote:
> > which two projects do you want to merge ruleset syntaxes for? 
> > FreedomBox+httpseverywhere? httpseverywhere+Privoxy? 
> > FreedomBox+Privoxy?  Or just what?

> httpseverywhere + Privoxy. The goals would be to:
> 1] give the most https rules for all users of either package;
> 2] reduce double-work of collecting new rules;

The Privoxy project currently doesn't collect any such rules
for Privoxy and I'm not aware of any intentions to change
this.

As far as I know the FreedomBox people are already using the
https-everywhere rules as a source, so there doesn't seem
to be any duplicated effort there either.

> 3] eliminate any need for end-users of one package to run a conversion
> script to import rules from the other package.

My impression is that the FreedomBox people intend to automate
the process already:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=30071793

Once that's done, we can add a link to the Privoxy documentation
so the Privoxy users on other platforms can profit from this
as well (assuming they are interested in the first place).

Fabian

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single
web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware,
SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial.
Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov

_______________________________________________
Ijbswa-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ijbswa-developers

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAlCuAUAACgkQSMVSH78upWMCTwCggZWkEzx/Q7WNgLAN6mYkuqym
up4An1E6BezSXvPNTm/iLJVJFWo7WvU4
=NQaY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----