|
|
|
|
|
by lmkg
800 days ago
|
|
Regarding point 1: The timeline in the linked article describes some communications as "pressure emails." I've heard the theory, but haven't seen solid evidence, that the pressure emails weren't just regular impatience from outside devs, but actually part of the attack. To convince the primary maintainer into granting access to another party. |
|
Here's the thing, if the maintainer was so tired and needed the help, the pressure is more risk than reward. The maintainer would be relieved to have help... But pressure risks estranging...
To be clear I'm aware this is just my own musing though.