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

Re: Proposal for removal of mICQ package

Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:


>>>>>> In article <[🔎] 20030214094725.GB1208@krikkit.ukeer.de>, Rico -mc- Gloeckner <debian@ukeer.de> writes:
>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 02:54:44AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:

>>> Still, the upstream is a cracker, and next time, he'll do worse.
>> Stop being ridiculous.  You are doing acussations which are simply
>> silly.  You are turning this into a flamewar against Upstream and
>> that is becoming more annoying than anything what Upstream did.
>	   I am silly? 

Yes you are when you say that next time he'll do worse "this boy have
stole a candy, we should kill him because next time he'll do worse"

> You want to ignore a denial of service poison pill, and you think I
> am being silly?

DOS ? Well, micq is an icq client, and the (very stupid) modification
made by upstream doesn't make me unable to use icq (well, I'm using

Be serious. The program even give a immediate solution to the
problem. (to download the upstream debian package). 

Of course, he is a very stupid, childish man for doing this, but it
doesn't make him a criminal.


>> Although iam not backing Ruediger up in this case - the Debian
>> Project does not only consist of the Debian maintainer only, there
>> could have happend a lot of talk to prevent all what happened now -
>> i do not see how removing the Package would do the Users any good.
>	We have to yank the package until we know there are no other
> such cool hacks waiting to hit our users again. Who knows who else he
> may have gotten mad at in the past and included other such brilliant
> pieces of hackery, just waiting to be triggered? Who knows whom he
> may get mad at in the future? 

I really believe that you are paranoid here.


Rémi Vanicat

Reply to: