This one time, at band camp, paddy said: > Andi, > > On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > > I think some issues are quite obvious: > > > > - packages should only go in in cooperation with the maintainers; > > > > - volatile is not "just another place" for backports, but should only > > contain changes to stable programs that are necessary to keep them > > functional; > > > > - Good candidates are clamav (including spin-offs), spamassassin, > > chkrootkit; > > > > - It should allow any administrator to "just use" volatile, as they "just > > use" security.d.o, and they should be confident that nothing is broken by > > that; > > > > - for bugs, the normal debian bug tracking system should be used. > > It suddenly strikes me that the link between, say, clamav and spamassassin > is > co-evolving enemies > > I think an explicit mention of the above as an ecological viewpoint is worthwhile > if only in this mail. (but only because I'm the only one to whom it wasn't > previously patently obvious :) This is precisely why I am interested in such a repository. the modern internet is an arms race, and relying on tools several years out of date is a poor solution. Thanks to Andi for your work - I will be in touch about how to work with you on this. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- | ,''`. Stephen Gran | | : :' : sgran@debian.org | | `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer | | `- http://www.debian.org | -----------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
pgpUVixsq8uHQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature