Rhino wrote: > 1. Should I be using a "feature" version, a "stable" version, > or some other > type of version? I'm okay with using code that might still > have *some* bugs > in it but I don't want to use something that is virtually > untested and FULL > of bugs so I'm not sure if 'feature' versions are for me.
The 1.12 feature branch is, from what I understand, quite robust and almost ready to be promoted to "Stable". So, from what you've said, you should find the feature version acceptable. > 2. What is the latest appropriate version of CVS for my > platform (WinXP)? 1.12.11 is the most recent version available. > I > went to the downloads page, > https://ccvs.cvshome.org/servlets/ProjectDocumentList, and expanded > 'binaries' and 'win32' but virtually everything in that list > has a status of > 'obsolete'; the only version of CVS in that list that isn't > obsolete is > cvs-1-11-17, which seems a bit back level if I should be > using a 'feature' > version since cvs-12-11 appears to exist, according to the home page. cvs-1-12-11.zip is there - it's about half way down the page. Here's a direct link: https://ccvs.cvshome.org/files/documents/19/623/cvs-1-12-11.zip > 3. This brings up a further question: should I even be using > a binary or > should I be downloading and compiling something newer? You'll need Microsoft Visual Studio to build it from source. CVS is written in C. > The CVS home page has a big warning about some kind of > security exposure and > provides a link to the 'Original publication' which supposedly gives > information that I can use to determine if my site is at > risk. Two questions > about that: > 1. Am I correct in assuming that the message on the home page > means that > some versions of CVS which have been downloaded in the past might be a > problem Correct - the warning has been up for several months, and the attacks have been fixed in the current versions. > "There are two ways of constructing a software design. One > way is to make it > so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the > other way is to > make it so complicated that there are no obvious > deficiencies." - C.A.R. Hoare So why does it seem most software these days is constructed the second way? <sigh> -- Jim Hyslop Senior Software Designer Leitch Technology International Inc. ( http://www.leitch.com ) Columnist, C/C++ Users Journal ( http://www.cuj.com/experts ) _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
