On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 11:20:50AM -0700, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 12:44:49PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote: > > I've cc:ed our stable release manager, ftp-masters, and the security > > team, in the hopes that they'll offer some insight into their > > understanding of their own responsibilities for sarge if this GR passes. > My assumption would be that we would continue to support the packages in > sarge. If the Social Contract somehow prevented us from doing that, would > it not also (directly) prevent us from continuing to distribute the > problematic packages? I agree that the implications are probably the same for providing ongoing security updates as they are for continuing to distribute the packages as-is; I would just like to hear from those responsible for both that they agree about what the implications under this particular GR *are*. Otherwise, I definitely think the GR needs revising. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature