Respository vandalism by root at ...fd.o

Matt Turner mattst88 at
Tue Nov 23 17:45:15 PST 2010

On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Frans de Boer <frans at> wrote:
> Thanks Adam,
> Because of my unfamiliarity with the people involved with xorg, can anybody
> verify the claim Adam made?

I can't verify it. But I had a pretty strong suspicion. :)

> If it was just a misplaced competition effort, I can continue to rely on the
> xorg code.

It was a prank. I'm sure he didn't foresee people getting this anxious over it.

> Also, if it turns out to be a validated claim Adam made, accept it as is and
> continue. Hopefully Adam has learned his lesson. But also
> should have it's act together. Do check the access rights and allow only
> trusted persons root access. Hopefully Adam was NOT one of them they trusted
> explicitly and he has only access due to historical reasons.

Adam was trusted, and is still trusted I'd say. Because it was a joke.
He made a funny commit in a branch of a dead project that no one has
even committed build fixes to since May. No one, especially Adam, is
going to insert backdoors in the xserver or whatever it is you're
thinking. The guy has 28 commits to the xserver alone since 1.9 was
released on August 20.


More information about the xorg mailing list