1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] Update of backport, policy proposal
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Update%20of%20backport%2C%20policy%20proposal&In-Reply-To=%3C201106301634.10720.stormi%40laposte.net%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="006163.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="005982.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] Update of backport, policy proposal</H1>
<B>Samuel Verschelde</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20Update%20of%20backport%2C%20policy%20proposal&In-Reply-To=%3C201106301634.10720.stormi%40laposte.net%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] Update of backport, policy proposal">stormi at laposte.net
</A><BR>
<I>Thu Jun 30 16:34:10 CEST 2011</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="006163.html">[Mageia-dev] Update of backport, policy proposal
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="005982.html">[Mageia-dev] Monitoring of new GNOME/upstream releases
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#6165">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#6165">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#6165">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#6165">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>
Le jeudi 30 juin 2011 15:59:21, Samuel Verschelde a écrit :
><i> Le vendredi 24 juin 2011 02:15:03, Michael Scherer a écrit :
</I>><i> > However, this mean that someone will have to check if the bug
</I>><i> > is fixed, and the question is "who" ( and I do not have a answer that I
</I>><i> > find good enough yet ). This could even be more tricky if we consider
</I>><i> > that this can be a version upgrade, and a security fix. Even if we trust
</I>><i> > the upstream to fix the security issue, we still want to have it
</I>><i> > working.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> That's a good question, given that priority will be given to stable updates
</I>><i> testing rather than backports. With a big security team I would say "the
</I>><i> security team", but for now I would trust the upstream here.
</I>
Or rather, "the packager who backported the software, with the help of the
security team and/or QA team if needed".
Samuel
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="006163.html">[Mageia-dev] Update of backport, policy proposal
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="005982.html">[Mageia-dev] Monitoring of new GNOME/upstream releases
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#6165">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#6165">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#6165">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#6165">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<hr>
<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev
mailing list</a><br>
</body></html>
|
