Re: Proposal for removal of mICQ package
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003 04:18, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > It is certainly the case that a maintainer is responsible for making sure
> > the uploaded packages are sound, but I think we need to face facts here:
> > we don't have so many skilled developers that we can reasonably expect to
> > audit the diffs of every new upstream release that's uploaded into our
> > archive.
>
> See, I find that claim, and the fact that people seem so willing to
> accept it, a lot more concerning than some stupid obfuscated printf and
> exit making it into unstable.
On a few occasions I have expressed the opinion that Debian developers should
be programmers and should have basic programming skills in the language of
the program that they are packaging.
On every occasion I was flamed by developers who do not meet those criteria.
There seems to be a reasonable number of people who have the opinion that
being capable of auditing the code is not a requirement. People who are
capable of auditing such code won't necessarily have time to do so either...
--
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Reply to: