John Allen wrote: > On Wednesday 03 September 2003 10:17, Radek Vybiral wrote: > > On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Robert Pollak wrote: > > > John Keller wrote: > > > > Cooker is always in flux but at certain moments, snapshots are made. > > > > > > Does this mean there will be no further stabilizing branch after 9.2, to > > > eventually get a 9.2.1? > > > > You may get 9.2.1 = 9.2 + updates. > > > > Whilst this is true, it would perhaps be better to have a real 9.2.1, 9.2.2 > etc.... > > ie. official points in time that reflect a 9.2 + a specific set of updates. > the /etc/mandrake-release file should also say 9.2.1 etc...
Yes, it would also be nice if crackers and researchers would stop trying to find security problems every day. And darned if fixes don't come out on a regular basis! :) I'm not sure what benefit having releases like this would give. Either you're patched or not. I can't think of any company that could devote resources to a new release on the schedule that a point-point release demands. Especially not any Linux distro company, who are all pulling a balancing act just maintaining a six-month cycle (or less). Apple does this do point-point releases in name, but that's because they release hardware and the releases could be normal point releases if it weren't for marketing. Even Microsoft doesn't bother, and they love release (marketing) events. I think you're worried about the wrong thing. "Official" has little to do with the name of the product and everything to do with the source of the updates. If you're already getting those (through the nicely done Mandrake Update tool, natch), it certainly isn't "better" to slap a point name on them. - John
