On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Ryan Schulze <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3/7/2013 8:34 PM, dan (ddp) wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Joe Gedeon <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Yes, but a 2.7.1 has not been uploaded to the download site that corrects >>> the issues. Latest release still downloads 2.6 even. Due to the bugs >>> that >>> have been corrected since 2.7 came out one would think that 2.7.1 would >>> already be the chosen version to host on the site for download. >>> >> Use the bitbucket source, it's easier. >> > > Easier said than done since there is no reference to the sourcecode on > bitbucket anywhere on ossec.net (one unsuspecting link to the 2.6 changelog > and the list of contributors aren't obvious places to look or find it). >
That is definitely something that should be corrected. > Even if I know where it is (and probably most other people following the > list) I suspect anyone that is considering using OSSEC in a production > environment will want to stick with the stable releases found on the > official website. > That seems like a flaw in their process. If they refuse to use the source, why use open source? -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ossec-list" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
