Re: the Y2K page
Wichert Akkerman said:
> I think we need to revamp the Y2K page; the list that is currently has
> is IMHO almost useless; I suggest replacing it with the list of Y2k
> updates that have been included in 2.1r4 and a link to the GNU Y2K page.
It hasn't been useless because it has stopped the (then) growing emails
to webmaster saying "is such and such package y2k?". I believe when
we started the page the aim was
1) To stop those annoying email messages by giving a central place to
check status of the packages.
2) To have a y2k statement from Debian.
The big problem is people not sending in updates about their packages,
I asked developers to send in the status of packages they maintain and
got about 5 replies. I think we have 300 developers so that's an
outstanding response.
There already is a link to the GNU page, a link to the 2.1r4 updates
would be useful for some but totally useless for anyone using potato.
Admittedly we do 1 much better than 2.
I had a look at RedHat's site to see what they did, it is at
http:/www.redhat.com/legal/y2k_statement.html and all looks nice and
warm and fuzzy, great huh?
Well, great if you run what they consider core stuff only. (I think
they spelt inetd wrong too). We cover a lot more than that.
- Craig
--
Craig Small VK2XLZ, PGP: AD 8D D8 63 6E BF C3 C7 47 41 B1 A2 1F 46 EC 90
Eye-Net Consulting http://www.eye-net.com.au/ <csmall@eye-net.com.au>
MIEEE <csmall@ieee.org> Debian developer <csmall@debian.org>
Reply to: