related to the
issue.
Andy.
--
View this message in context:
http://openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/Security-releases-tp4667898p4667944.html
Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
+1 - good idea
As for the su1 or sec01 suffixes, I was thinking the same thing as well but now
I prefer the additional .1 instead. The reason is it makes it easier for
tooling to compare versions. jm2c.
Regards,
Alan
On Feb 19, 2014, at 11:16 AM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote:
> +1 looks goo
Agree with the possible more work, but it should be hopefully for us, isn't
it?
I mean, the main goal is to have limited changes so that customers/users
are confident in upgrading.
So, if more work for us, but less for users, the target is achieved IMHO.
JLouis
2014-02-19 21:54 GMT+01:00 Romain
+1 if possible (the issue will be to upgrade a lib without uprgading
to next version, can need as much work as upgrading to trunk
sometimes...)
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com
+1 for having quick and minimal effort security-only releases.
At least for updating the latest release in cases where the
patch has limited impact on everything else ("minimal effort").
--
Bjorn Danielsson
Cuspy Code AB
David Blevins wrote:
> So as I mentioned in the security reporting threa
+1 looks good.
Just regarding the latest digit, was wondering is we could use instead:
su1, security update 1
sec01, security 01
The latest one is the more commonly used.
JLouis
2014-02-19 18:08 GMT+01:00 David Blevins :
> So as I mentioned in the security reporting thread, although we do alw
So as I mentioned in the security reporting thread, although we do always use
the most recent versions of everything in our releases, we should probably
address our timing.
Over the lifetime of TomEE we average 4.14 months between releases. Also in
the lifetime of TomEE, there've been about 18
