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

Re: Proposal for removal of mICQ package

#include <hallo.h>
* Craig Dickson [Thu, Feb 13 2003, 11:27:04PM]:

> Debian maintainer typically did it (without any defined value for
> EXTRAVERSION, against upstream's clearly-expressed wishes), when run by

Something that could be handled sanely inside of the developers

> were somehow compromising the security of the end user's machine (it
> wasn't), nor to call it a "trojan", as if it were sneakily doing
> something behind the end user's back (it wasn't; the refusal to run is

Maintainer isn't a user? A software that expires silently (read: same
thing as bad shareware does) on certain systems is not trojaned? IMHO
this is something violation DSFG in the first line.

> development process is silly, since it's surely quite normal for new
> versions of programs to have behaviors (intentional or otherwise) that
> the package maintainer doesn't know about. Had upstream simply left out

And deliberate sabotage acts, confusing the maintainer in the mind, is
something we should expect from every new upstream version?

"Linux is like a wigwam, no windows no gates and a apache inside."

Attachment: pgp2iz1Hv_dz5.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: