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

Re: Updating scanners and filters in Debian stable (3.1)

Stephen Gran <sgran@debian.org> writes:

> What I (and it seems, others) would like to see is:
> 3) some other method to upgrade software that has to change rapidly to
>    meet new classes of threats, even though these threats may not affect
>    the machine running the software itself.  This category seems to me 
>    to be composed of A/V scanners, anti-spam suites, and IDS-type software.  
>    I may be missing some, and I'm sure someone will chime in with it.

What we want with this is a way that is *stable*.  If you can't
promise me stability, then I don't want it (or I want it at arm's

The backport work is part of the beast here, and "where the archive
lands" or "which team does the work" is only a red-herring.  That's
why I kept saying "we have a procedure"--because the problem is not
the absence of an archive, nor the absence of a team; the problem is
an agreed maintenance strategy.

I would like to see a concrete proposal that is something more than
"we need a place where we can make arbitrary changes to certain
packages in stable."  In particular, I would like to see something
like what we have for the existing security maintenance scheme: a
policy that requires backporting and does not simply wholesale include
new upstream versions complete with all the new features--and
bugs--that they may have.


Reply to: