Re: "stable" vs "security stable"

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Coywolf Qi Hunt wrote:
On 10/9/05, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 15:44:38 +0800, Coywolf Qi Hunt said:

On 10/9/05, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

It is "security stable". Let's take this new notation from now on.
"Security Stable" doesn't have to be all security related.

Tell you what - you convince the -stable team, and I'll go along with it..



Better be "stable" and "base". 2.6.13.3 is the latest stable, 2.6.13
is the latest base.

I think the idea of having the most recent "base release," and -stable, and -rc, and -git, are desirable, with some clear terms. Those of us who started with ftp and never felt the need for using a GUI have long since learned what to keep and where to find it, but I bet most people use the web by now.

--
   -bill davidsen ([email protected])
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
 last possible moment - but no longer"  -me
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux