> Yes.  I might add that, the more someone tells me
> that I should be happy 
> to let someone else look after my best interests,
> the more suspicious I 
> become of them.

Wow, you must be suspicious of all developers then,
they all look after your best interest. ;) 

Actually, its not really a matter to be suspicious
about. Its just a way to let someone else maintain and
deal with crap. I have seen quite a few very
improperly coded ruby libraries out there. One of the
steps in Batsman's next near phase is to get a QA
team. Examining code, giving rating on how it might be
improperly coded.

A very good example of bad ruby code would be
Raimo(AIM library). No offense, but the college kid
who wrote it can't code worth a damn :). I was shocked
when I read the code, I was even more shocked to know
that the author of raimbo ( aim raim bot using raimo )
just copied the code. (raimo) There were ';'s after
each line, there was some spaghetti code. It was
*horrible*. This is the type of QA besides 'security'
that needs to be handled.

> 
> So, I'd like to thank Mr. Ross for reminding me that
> people who 
> download must be cautious, and look at the code. It
> cannot be up to 
> someone else.

I have to disagree, other people seem to do well
looking at other code. Debian's QA team does a good
job of backporting (updated patches etc) the debian
pacakges. So, it can be left up to someone else. This
is the best way, like it or not.

> 
> James
> 
> 
> 
> 


------------------------------------
-- Name: David Ross
-- Phone: 865.539.3798
-- Email: dross [at] yahoo [dot] com
------------------------------------


		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail