Re: Proposal: gnome-user-share

[Callum McKenzie <callum physics otago ac nz>]

On Tue, 2004-11-30 at 22:25 -0500, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> How very true. Just because Apache has had a lot of security holes, and
> they've been fixed, doesn't mean there won't be more, either.
But a lot more man-hours have been spent breaking apache, both
deliberately and accidentally. This is why it is trusted more (even once
you weight for the size of the code).

Of course the higher rate of new (untested) code added to Apache weighs
against it.

And you are right about libhowl and a lot of other code we "trust", it
shouldn't be (I'm not even sure libhowl is 64-bit clean, it certainly
wasn't six months ago). That isn't an excuse for choosing more untrusted
code, there have to be other, serious, advantages (even then we may be
being stupid in doing so).

 - Callum