On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 02:48:01PM -0500, Mike Pagano wrote: > On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 01:08:21PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 01:29:15PM -0500, Mike Pagano wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 11:11:32AM -0600, William Hubbs wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 11:21:56AM -0500, Mike Pagano wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 05:47:10PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote: > > > > > > All, > > > William, > > > > > > At what point do we not care about users who have not upgraded and will > > > miss this security message? > > > > I would say that's more up to you as the maintainer, but put something > > to the affect in the mask comment. > > > > # This mask will be removed <whenever> > > > > William > > > > Fair enough. This question is to anyone that supports users and works on > bugs. Especially the portage devs. At what point do you say to a user > that their system is so old that they really need to upgrade? > > 2 years, 1 year, < 1 year? Maybe that's a good thing to state in > documentation.
We already have a distro policy about this. I put ulm on this email specifically, because he knows where the link is, and I don't right now. Basically, at the distro level, anything over a year old is fair game to be dropped. William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
