> Please keep the discussion technical. If you don't agree with me > this is fine. But when you express your opinion about my lack of > modesty, this is getting personal.
He can't do that, shouldn't do that, shouldn't even want to do that. You're a human being, not a machine. You deserve to be treated as a person, not as a system of inputs and outputs. Ideas should be criticized or praised purely on a technical basis, but people should be criticized or praised purely on a *human* basis. I've looked over your egpg code. My bloodless technical evaluation is simple: "it is nowhere near ready for production environments." And I think if you read over the other technical criticisms you've received, you'll see this is pretty much a consensus opinion. By your own admission, it has not received any kind of peer review or independent code audit. And yet, you feel it's appropriate to recommend to the Debian folks they put this code on a live CD image they intend for use in high-risk environments, *and* you think they should put together a .deb package for you. That you believe your project is ready for inclusion into a live CD image meant for hostile environments is, I think, enough to make me question your wisdom. And that *is* a personal judgment, and I make no apologies for that. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users