Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:46:51AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 04:27:50PM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> > If I had to think of a rationale for it, the only one I could think of
> > would be "the architecture needs to be fast enough not to block security
> > updates".
> > However, I consider an update whose $ARCH binaries are released a week
> > later not to be a problem.
> I think a lot of users would consider it a problem. Imagine, would you be
> happy with a highly visible public announcement of every vulnerability
> against your servers, a week before you got the fix?
If I'm running m68k, I probably wouldn't care so much, and besides --
Debian security announcements are rarely the first highly visible
public announcement of a vulnerability.