On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 09:21:44PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
Yes, this is the correct approach in principle, but I don't think
release candidates should be uploaded to volatile. But I can't speak
for debian-volatile, really.
Never noticed the rc in the version number there. I suppose
This one time, at band camp, Michael Stone said:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 07:27:14PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
I think one the reason why clamav is in volatile is that the engine
might need updating to detect new viruses. Is that something you
want to support in stable-security?
I
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:37:35PM +0100, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
I'm right now in the process of preparing an upload of clamav 0.95rc1; as
such,
the question is: where to upload to? unstable? volatile? Any of the other
queues?
Maybe I'm not quite clear on the concept of volatile, but I
* Tom Furie:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:37:35PM +0100, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
I'm right now in the process of preparing an upload of clamav 0.95rc1; as
such,
the question is: where to upload to? unstable? volatile? Any of the other
queues?
Maybe I'm not quite clear on the concept of
* Luk Claes:
Currently the security support for the volatile archive is supposed
to be taken care of by the uploaders of the respective packages.
I think it would make sense to have someone or a team tracking
security issues for volatile.
What do you think? Is anyone up
Hi
Currently the security support for the volatile archive is supposed to
be taken care of by the uploaders of the respective packages.
I think it would make sense to have someone or a team tracking security
issues for volatile.
What do you think? Is anyone up to providing such issue tracking
* Luk Claes:
Currently the security support for the volatile archive is supposed
to be taken care of by the uploaders of the respective packages.
I think it would make sense to have someone or a team tracking
security issues for volatile.
What do you think? Is anyone up to providing
7 matches
Mail list logo
