Hello DPL candidate who signed the Vancouver plan, (Excluding Anthony Towns who signed as (ftpmaster) not as (DPL candidate).) The Vancouver plan has several mention of the security team which lead to believe it was accomodated to address the concern of this team. However <20050316115031.GC5330@finlandia.infodrom.north.de> shows that the security team was not consulted and the most active security officer does not endorse the plan, and has no problem suporting 20 architectures security-wise. Did you sign on the assumption it has been reviewed by the security team, or did you know they had not been consulted ? Did you make some investigations ? Ftp-master and release team are well within their right to issue their proposed plan without consulting others team. However, you signed in your quality of DPL-candidate and the DPL role is to get advice from relevant parties before endorsing a plan. So, will you act differently if you are elected ? Cheers, -- Bill. <ballombe@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here.
Attachment:
pgp2NoNvlG7fp.pgp
Description: PGP signature