| 1 |
On 2/4/19 9:02 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> What is that reason? How is 'blindly accepting community contributions' |
| 4 |
> different from 'blindly accepting new developers'? In the former case, |
| 5 |
> at least we're not pretending things are secure when they're not. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
The difference is the amount of effort and foresight involved (which, by |
| 9 |
the way, increases with the recent WoT proposal). |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
It took a few months worth of nights and weekends to become a developer. |
| 12 |
Yes, I can commit something malicious -- it will work, and then my |
| 13 |
credentials will be revoked. Now if I want to do it again, I have to |
| 14 |
come up with a fake name and fake online identity, and then spend at |
| 15 |
least a couple weeks re-earning my developer status. As lots of |
| 16 |
potential developers (including myself at one time) have pointed out, |
| 17 |
that all sucks and nobody wants to do it. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
But, with an "official" completely unreviewed repository, I can |
| 20 |
compromise everyone who uses it immediately and then do the same thing |
| 21 |
again tomorrow. I still think there's some value to it, but it can't be |
| 22 |
completely unreviewed and also occupy the same keyword space. |
Archives