On Sun, Dec 14, 2003 at 11:19:47AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
> > Well, compromise the machine of some DDs and you have the same. Compromising
> > machines opens are serious security issue regardless for what the machine is
> > used.
> Yes. But debian-admin is not responsible for those machines; therefore,
> they are irrelevant to the discussion of "why hasn't debian-admin fixed
> <foo>". That, and most developer machines tende to have a half dozen
> packages, at most, rather than 9000...
What makes you think that DSA is responsible for all buildds?
> Or maybe it's an evil conspiracy. No, you're right, it must be; there's no
> other *possible* explanation...
Why people tend to become polemic when they have no arguments left?
> > Try to coordinate? When there would have been a try to cooperate by him, I
> > wouldnīt complain... but I do complain.
> Unless you are the local administrator of one of the build daemons, I
> doubt you'd have seen any of his attempts at coordination. Even if you
> are, it's quite possible that he simply hasn't gotton that far down the
> list yet. (Though I'd consider it a more significant failure, given that
> he presumably should be sending some form of "let me know when you can be
> available if we need it" emails).
So, you obviously have no clue that Iīm running a buildd, but youīre trying
to comment on stuff you donīt know the stories behind? Funny...
> > And as pointed out by me, Itīs more than 1 business day.
> Okay. So it's 3. That's still ludicrously good to have ANYTHING like the
> amount of progress we've seen, given Debian's history. And, frankly, if
> you've ever had to try to recover a compromised remote box which had stuff
> on it that you couldn't just wipe out, I would expect you to have some
> understanding of how good it is to manage to get as many buildds done as
> quickly as has happened.
And I can tell you that the process could have been faster.
Of course itīs lot of work for a single person to manage several machines at
the same time.
> In other words, the only two explanations I can see are either that you
> have no real concept of what you're discussing, or that you're being
> deliberately obtuse about the lot of it.
Donīt always speak with the man in the mirror.
--
Ciao... //
Ingo \X/
