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: THOUGHT: New 'user-contributed' section?

On Wed, 9 Apr 1997, joost witteveen wrote:

> > 
> > The following is not a proposal, however I'd appreciate to know what
> > people think about this: 
> 
> > So, what do you think?
> > 	[X] Interesting... Needs more discution.
> 
> Well, who is going to maintain the packages. It may well be that
> today the package looks quite OK and "we" (whoever that may be) decides
> we like the package. But bugs will probably be found, and should be 
> fixed. Should we allow for "floating maintainers" who just fix bugs
> for various "new-contrib" packages, or, if they don't feel like fixing
> them, the packages loose their "stamp of approval"?
> 
> So in general:
>   - who decides the packages are OK in the first place?

As the Testing Coordinator you can guess my answer ;-)

I have always believed that the proper way to keep Debian trojan free is
to test packages, not maintainers. Not to say we should not take
"reasonable" precautions, like md5sums on source files, but, no matter how
completely you check out a possible maintainer, you still stand a good
chance of missing a pathological person (they typically know how to
behave, even to the point of being able to pass polygraphs)

My suggestion on project management in general would be:

	1. Let anyone upload packages into "unstable"
	2. Make the criterion for movement from unstable to "tested" based
	   on the getting an OK from the testing group.

This will also result in better "integration" of packages as they become
modified and updated. Even simple packaging problems would then get
resolved before we even get close to a release.

Sorry for dragging the discussion off to the side a bit, but I feel this
is important.

>   - Who fixes bugs?
> 
I don't see that it matters, if the fix is completely tested before it
goes into stable.

BTW, moving to this method would give "real" meaning to the names stable
and unstable.

Waiting is,

Dwarf
-- 
_-_-_-_-_-_-                                          _-_-_-_-_-_-_-

aka   Dale Scheetz                   Phone:   1 (904) 656-9769
      Flexible Software              11000 McCrackin Road
      e-mail:  dwarf@polaris.net     Tallahassee, FL  32308

_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-