On 04/20/2012 11:33 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
On Apr 20, 2012, at 11:25 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Dave;
--- Ven 20/4/12, Dave Fisher<[email protected]> ha scritto:
...
On Apr 20, 2012, at 10:14 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
Pedro Giffuni wrote on Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 07:41:19
-0700:
...
We are specifically warning people that the older
OOo releases contain security and IP risks so it
would be inconsistent to carry those in Apache
mirrors.
So, yes, those can be dropped.
Thanks, I'll take that answer back to the mirror
operators if no one disagrees in the next few days.
I think that Kay just disagreed, but only on the ooo-dev
part of the thread.
yes, I didn't note the other address...
I don't think he suggested we force mirrors to carry
old versions.
I think Kay's (and Regina's) concern will be solved once
3.3.0 finds it's way into
http://archive.apache.org/dist/incubator/ooo/
Well, when I responded to this, I wasn't thinking about security
concerns *at all*. Hmmm...that DOES change the equation a bit.
I'm assuming by Pedro's remark that if 3.3.0 is ported to Apache
archives, security patches will have been applied -- i.e. THAT version
rebuilt with security, right?
These can be pulled in from download.services.openoffice.org and MirrorBrain.
Then MirrorBrain will need to change to use archive.apache.org as a source.
And of course people can always choose to carry those
older versions on their own if they want to.
Sure.
Regards,
Dave
Pedro.
