Mike Bird <mgb-devuan@???> writes:

> On Mon April 1 2019 14:18:38 Martin Steigerwald wrote:
>> For me that is good enough.
>
> When core team member Evilham writes "it still looks as
> if gdo and the build system were compromised" [1] I need a
> lot more than a limited admission of guilt from KatolaZ
> before trusting that Evilham was mistaken rather than
> KatolaZ just managed to hide his tracks better.

Obviously, even when trying, it is impossible to pick words in a
perfect
way since natural language is imprecise.

You are reading too much into that phrase.

In the context, it referred to the "pwned site" (still viewable)
**claiming** ("looks as") that gdo had been compromised.

If you read a paragraph further, that point is made very clear,
when I
mention that the "joke" wouldn't have been half as bad if it had
been
limited in scope to the plain devuan-web.

I kindly ask you not to read things that are not there and jump to
conspirations, it is what it is: a fuck up, a beautifully executed
one,
but a fuck up and a recognised one at that.
Discussing at this length what the fine letter said is not going
to help
move things forward, quite the opposite.

Again: there is no reasonable ground to think devuan the signing
keys
have been compromised or anyone with access to infrastructure is
acting
with ill-intention.

This email could have been signed, but being abroad and all,
access is
not the most trivial and it likely won't suffice for you, so I
have
better things to do, like sleeping!
--
Evilham