anonym: [snip]
> Thanks for the clarification! > > To me this means the responsible thing vs. our users is to release now, but > it is still unclear what is responsible vs release coordination with our > upstreams. The sort of answer I'd be looking for is from our upstreams is: > > * "As an upstream, we agree that protecting your users is more important than > release coordination between our projects, so please go ahead and release > early", or > > * "As an upstream, we feel release coordination is very important; please > rebuild Tails 3.2 with the old browser and prepare an emergency release with > the new browser in two days, or simply delay the release if you cannot afford > this". > > (Note: these are just examples, I'm sure there are other positions to hold on > this matter.) > > Any way, it's clear there won't be an agreement in time for an early release > to make sense, so I'll delay Tails until tomorrow. Let's downgrade the > urgency of this thread, but let's not drop it; I'd like to know what to do > next time this happens! If you think you have really good arguments that it is urgent that Tails users get the update X days earlier than we (and Mozilla) are releasing then I am happy to explain that to users on our blog and elsewhere (who might be wondering what's up with the new Tor Browser and Firefox versions we and Mozilla are about to get out). Or put in different words: there are costs involved for upstream projects by downstream releasing new versions earlier and there are risks involved by downstream doing so (missing last minute bugfixes etc.). But if you still think that's worth it in particular cases, then go for releasing earlier. Georg
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.
