Re: Food for thought - SECURITY (design flaw?)

[Carlos Carvalho <carlos@fisica.ufpr.br>]

Andreas Tille (tillea@rki.de) wrote on 12 February 2001 11:32:
 >IMHO people of security team shouldn't spend their time to serve
 >security fixes for testing.  People who want to use testing on
 >security relevant machines should know what they do and should be
 >able to handle those issues themselves.  Those hazardeurs could try
 >to fix important bugs of the package which is stick to unstable for
 >whatever reason which would help the whole distribution or backport
 >the stuff themself.

What's the purpose of testing exactly? If it's a preparation for
becoming stable it should obviously include the security fixes,
otherwise when the transition testing -> stable happens you're... If
it's not a preparation for stable it has no purpose.

If this issue isn't explained I'll just move to unstable and ignore
testing, because going back to stable is no option.