On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Timothy Ball wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 12:48:03AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Timothy Ball <timball@tux.org> wrote:
> > > Now the brokeness of the mICQ pkg could and *should* have been
> > > found by the maintainer *way* before this ever became an issue. It
> > > should have been worked out by the maintainer and the upstream
> > > author. The sheer fact that it has become an issue shows negligence
> > > of the debian maintainer.
> >
> > Well, yes and no. No single person can test all code paths
> > in, say, emacs, or all kernel config options, or all parts of
> > Gnus. Test as best you can, release early, release often.
> >
> > All One can really ask a maintainer is that the auses opckage is
> > installable, and they ran the apckage through a test
> > suite. Exhaustive testing is not something that can be reasonably
> > expected of the maintainers (or even the authors).
> >
>
> Hey I can expect the maintainer to at least try to install his own deb
> and run the program. I'm not saying every pkg should be unit tested...
> okay maybe I am saying that each pkg should be unit tested, but in the
> least can chapter 7. of the DNMG have more than just ten sentences?
You realize that this very trojan was designed to never activate in the
maintainer's hands?
Peter
--
PGP signed and encrypted | .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux **
messages preferred. | : :' : The universal
| `. `' Operating System
http://www.palfrader.org/ | `- http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
pgpYtWHGXb0aC.pgp
Description: PGP signature