A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-December/070207.html below:

[Python-Dev] LSB: Selection of a Python version

[Python-Dev] LSB: Selection of a Python version [Python-Dev] LSB: Selection of a Python version"Martin v. Löwis" martin at v.loewis.de
Tue Dec 5 07:30:56 CET 2006
Neal Norwitz schrieb:
> What, if any, impact do you think the LSB should have wrt maintaining 2.4?

People at the meeting specifically said whether security patches would
still be applied to older releases, and for how many older releases.
Linux distributors are hesitant to make commitments to maintain a
software package if they know that their upstream source doesn't provide
security patches anymore.

I think we should come up with a policy for dealing with security
patches (there haven't been that many in the past, anyway); I believe
users (i.e. vendors in this case) would be happy with the procedure
we followed for 2.3: just produce a source release integrating the
security patches; no need for binary releases (as they will produce
binaries themselves).

So I think a public statement that we will support 2.4 with security
patches for a while longer (and perhaps with security patches *only*)
would be a good thing - independent of the LSB, actually.

Regards,
Martin
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4