The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RFC] Restructuring of the Debian Project

On Thu, 6 Mar 1997, Chris Fearnley wrote:

> 'Mike Neuffer wrote:'
> >
> >No, it is not that the other packages should not be tested.
> >It is that the core should not be released if there are problems.
> >
> >It is a MUST for the core and a less restrictive situation for the rest.
> >
> >The core ensures that you have _functional_ machine _without_ conflicts
> >and problems. The additional packages must of course also be tested,
> >but are a "second tier".
> 
> The fallacy here is that it is possible for a non-core package to
> break the core system.  Bad maintainer scripts, bad control file
> information and the like.  Therefore, the non-core parts should not be
> released if they break the system in any serious way as well.
> 
> To date it requires experienced developers to look at new packages and
> try to spot (or worse experience) such bugs.  A debcheck mechanism may allow
> automation of this, but it would still be possible to slip a serious
> error into a maintainer script.
> 
> Even when you look beyond the packaging issues, fatal interactions among
> software can cause a non-core part of the system to break the whole
> system (mainly only daemons can do this).  For example, I could care
> less if mgetty failed to work correctly (for many people it's not
> core), but if it corrupts wtmp then it's a serious problem (not to say
> that mgetty is guilty of this, I think we haven't identified the cause
> of this bug yet - it's just a for instance of a non-core package whose
> serious bug would adversely affect the whole system).


Yes, of course. BUT the point I am trying to make, is that we need a
base/core/whatever system, that is standard on all machines, gives us
basic functionality and is "guarantied" to work.

The other packages outsie this core might interact and cause failures in
whatever way is an additional issue that of course also must be tackled,
but is is not a total and complete showstoper as failures within the core
are.

Mike

Michael Neuffer                i-Connect.Net, a Division of iConnect Corp.
mike@i-Connect.Net             Home of the Debian Master Server.
mike@debian.org                14355 SW Allen Blvd., Suite 140
503.641.8774                   Beaverton, OR 97005