Re: Another Non-Free Proposal
> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:28:20AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > > We don't provide security support for non-free, to my knowledge.
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:52:47AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Not at the level of main.
On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 08:37:28AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> At what level *do* we provide it?
At the level of non-free, duh.
Or: if I understood the problem you were trying to solve, I could probably
give you a more pertinent answer.
> > However, we can be fairly confident that a DD won't introduce a
> > deliberate security flaw into non-free.
>
> How much does that really buy us? Isn't that kind of a cold comfort?
Us as developers? Or us as users?
For contrast, I can go out to apt-get.org, poke around at the resulting
archives, and find a guy who has a "warez" directory sitting beside his
debian stuff. I don't *know* that he is doing anything unethical, but I'm
just a touch uneasy about installing anything I download from his site.
> It didn't take the introduction of deliberate security flaw into main to
> disrupt this entire project[1], resulting in a loss of services to the
> developers that still hasn't been completely rectified, and probably
> won't be[2].
Yeah, things could be worse.
> You can perhaps be forgiving for not noticing this event, given the
> extent of your level of participation in the Project[3].
Um... I've been hit by that outage too. And I am reasonbly certain you
know that because you posted a reply to my message which mentioned that.
However, I suppose you're not engaging in ad hominem because technically
you didn't present a logical argument.
--
Raul
Reply to: