Re: apt 0.6 and how it does *not* solve the problem
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:07, Thomas Bushnell BSG <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Russell Coker <email@example.com> writes:
> > Removing developers who don't meet certain criteria (EG no package
> > uploads for 6 months) from active status makes a lot of sense.
> > Anyone care to propose a GR?
> Careful about terminology here. I wouldn't say "remove", just we drop
> them from the list of signatures. They are still Debian developers.
Removing from active status seems appropriate to me.
If we are afraid of compromised packages then we can't have an automated
method of changing status back to active.
http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page