Re: wordpress, again
On 28/11/13 09:36, John Hasler wrote:
> Scott Ferguson
>> It would have been helpful to preface your post with "I'm guessing..."
Let me rephrase that...
It would have been helpful to preface your post with "Nothing to do with
the OPs question, this is on a completely different tangent..."
>
> Why? What I wrote is true. The Debian Wordpress package happens to be
> an installer package created by the Debian Wordpress maintainers, but
> what I wrote applies to it as it does to all Debian packages.
At best it's ambiguous as it doesn't clarify the difference between the
installer and what is installed. Notice that the OP has no interest in
the version of the installer (because it's irrelevant). Out on a limb much?
>
The OP asks for help installing WordPress using the Debian package.
Chris (and others) suggest not using it because it's out of date (which
is not true).
> Chris Davies writes:
>> Last time I looked, the wordpress package was a point or two behind
>> the current version. Many of these point releases seem to be to fix
>> security issues, so I have to question the wisdom of using an "older"
>> version for a potentially Internet-facing server.
>
You write:-
> Debian backports security fixes to Stable. That's why they have a
> security team and it's what they mean when they say that Stable is
> supported.
Which has what to do with the currency of WordPress? Ambiguous?
Deceptive? Off on a tangent? Part of an unrelated thread?
Backports? Where did that come from?
Who said anything about Stable?
Reply to: