On Mon, 10 Mar 2008, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
This sentence specifically talks about the duration of security
support. Obviously there are other aspects of security support, but
the sentence doesn't talk about that, and it's not clear that
Debian's security support quality would be superior
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, MJ Ray wrote:
Is it really necessary to force a change?
force is probably too strong of a word; feel free to substitute
require.
Won't you compromise? I suggested a way to be proud, without the
such a long time phrase.
I don't really see that there's a compromise here
Le March 10, 2008 04:43:30 pm, vous avez écrit :
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 04:13:43PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
Le March 10, 2008 02:56:15 pm Luk Claes, vous avez ?crit?:
Filipus Klutiero wrote:
Hi,
I reported #468765 about a questionable statement on www.debian.org.
Frank
On Mon, 10 Mar 2008, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
This sentence specifically talks about the duration of security
support. Obviously there are other aspects of security support, but
the sentence doesn't talk about that, and it's not clear that
Debian's security support quality would be superior to
Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...]
If there are serious numbers of developers and contributors who don't
feel proud about the work that's been done, then they should voice
support for some modification to the text. [...]
Sorry, but that's a misleading requirement. I'm proud about
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, MJ Ray wrote:
I'm proud about the work that's been done, but I'm not proud that
3.1 has security support for only a year after 4.0 was released.
You yourself may not be, but some of us still are. Again, if there are
enough people who aren't proud about the level of support
6 matches
Mail list logo
