Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:14:03 -0400 | From | Bill Davidsen <> | Subject | Re: "stable" vs "security stable" |
| |
Coywolf Qi Hunt wrote: > On 10/9/05, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote: > >>On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 15:44:38 +0800, Coywolf Qi Hunt said: >> >>>On 10/9/05, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote: >> >>>It is "security stable". Let's take this new notation from now on. >>>"Security Stable" doesn't have to be all security related. >> >>Tell you what - you convince the -stable team, and I'll go along with it.. >> > > > Better be "stable" and "base". 2.6.13.3 is the latest stable, 2.6.13 > is the latest base.
I think the idea of having the most recent "base release," and -stable, and -rc, and -git, are desirable, with some clear terms. Those of us who started with ftp and never felt the need for using a GUI have long since learned what to keep and where to find it, but I bet most people use the web by now.
-- -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com) "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the last possible moment - but no longer" -me - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |