Re: Food for thought - SECURITY (design flaw?)
Andreas Tille (firstname.lastname@example.org) 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.