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

Re: developer's guide to security updates

On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 07:32:04PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> I suppose if it came to that, one could always push out an unstable
> version that does something like "* fixed minor typo in man page" (there
> always is one ;-)

So, in that case, the unstable version would not get the fix until: (1)
the fix was accepted by the security infrastructure for testing; (2) the
fix showed up in testing; (3) a new version was uploaded to unstable.
Does this mean that unstable would actually lag behind testing for
security updates?

To fix that, I suggest that there be some way to tell the security
infrastructure to install a new version to unstable at the same time as it
puts it in testing. Also, what will happen with security updates to
testing once testing has been unfrozen after the release of woody? The
document seems to indicate that they, once accepted, built, and
verified, would end up in sarge-proposed-updates waiting to be added to
sarge. Of course, common sense dictates that they would go into sarge
directly, while (sarge == testing) && (testing.is_frozen == false). (Of
course, s/sarge/whatever woody+1 ends up being called/g.

- Jimmy Kaplowitz

Attachment: pgpsKlcLcxnoZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: