On Jan 05, 2012, at 08:35 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >Uh, surely no-one is suggesting backporting to "ancient" versions? I >couldn't find the statement quickly on the python.org website (so this >is via google), but isn't it true that 2.6 is in security-only mode >and 2.5 and earlier will never get the fix? Having a source-only >release for 2.6 means the fix is "off by default" in the sense that >you can choose not to build it. Or add a #ifdef to the source if it >really matters. Correct, although there's no reason why a patch for versions older than 2.6 couldn't be included on a python.org security page for reference in CVE or other security notifications. Distros that care about versions older than Python 2.6 will basically be back-porting the patch anyway. >My feeling is that it should go into 2.7, 3.2, and 3.3+, but with no >bells and whistles to switch it off or the like. I like David Malcolm's suggestion, but I have no problem applying it to 3.3, enabled by default with no way to turn it off. The off-by-default on-switch policy for stable releases would be justified by maximum backward compatibility conservativeness. -Barry
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