[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: The New Security Build Infrastructure

if there is a conflict the social contract should be updated.

On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 10:56:16PM +0100, Stephen Stafford wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 11:34:59PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> > 
> > > The major difference is that security updates frequently shouldn't be
> > > made public as soon as they're ready;
> > 
> > By the way, handling security updates this way conflicts more and more
> > with the Social Contract in its current form.
> > 
> Didn't we already *have* this flamewar recently?
> This is the way it is with security, it is that way for some very good
> reasons.  We either accept it, or we don't *get* the advance notice and
> chance to release security updates.  That *would* conflict with our social
> contract as it would most definitely *not* be looking after the best
> interests of our users.
> Stephen


"I hope you learn speaking English proper I hope speak I me you."
     -- Branden Robinson, 2001

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: