> Brian Lloyd wrote:
> > As the person who unfailingly gets flamed no matter which way the
> > decisions leans :), I think we are probably at a point where we
> > should have an official, documented and community-agreed-to policy
> > on how these kinds of things will be handled.
> My intent was not flaming anyone... Sorry for that. I just tried
> to take the
> voice of the "average" Zope-Admin (installs Zope from a recent stable
> release, waits for the security-maintainers of distros to get security
> patches etc.).
Sorry, I should have been more clear. I didn't mean to imply
that your or Jamie's notes were flames (they're definitely not),
just that I'd been singed in the past ;)
> > At a minimum, having a clear and documented policy would provide
> > the benefit of 'no surprises' - if you disagree with the policy,
> > or some aspect of it, you would at least be able to plan around it.
> Very good idea...:) If all Zope-Admins can read before an installation:
> "Security exploits will be exposed to the public as soon as they're
> resolved in the CVS" everyone will & should run Zope out of CVS.
...or will decide that doing so is unreasonable and use something
else instead :( Note that I'm not necessarily criticizing that
particular policy, just pointing out that _any_ policy will have
some upside and some downside. The challenge will be coming to
agreement on a policy with the right balance that everyone can
Brian Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
V.P. Engineering 540.361.1716
Zope Corporation http://www.zope.com
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -