Re: Updating scanners and filters in Debian stable (3.1)
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 11:32:05PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Actually, I'm considering very much to pick the task up (and have also
> already volatile.d.n ;), but there are some issues that needs to be
> considered before doing a public announcement.
Andi,
Another observation:
Three months is a long time in virus scanning.
Our use-case is a battery of virus-scanners over email before it is
delivered to windows workstations equipped with various windows
virus scanners. In the worst case the windows scanners have left
the workstation vulnerable for one week, perhaps two at the outside.
I realise we are not talking about virus definitions that are three
months out of date, but all the same.
I will see what I can do to help better characterise and quantify what
timeliness is for various software and use-cases and report back if you
like.
I doubt that all these software move at the same speed.
I wonder if it would make more sense to gear the process of promotion
from staging to release against yardsticks other than time.
(I already assume three months would be: about three months, but when
its ready)
What are the pros and cons for volatile-{stable,release,or-whatever-you-call-it}
as an all-at-once release model, rather than a rolling-when-its-ready
model more like security.d.o ?
Does anybody want to use a three month old clamav ?
(with up-to-date definitions of course)
Why?
Regards,
Paddy
>
>
> Cheers,
> Andi
> --
> http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
> PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: