Re: "stable" vs "security stable"

[Bill Davidsen]

Coywolf Qi Hunt wrote:
> On 10/9/05, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx <Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 15:44:38 +0800, Coywolf Qi Hunt said:
> >
> > > On 10/9/05, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx <Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > It is "security stable". Let's take this new notation from now on.
> > > "Security Stable" doesn't have to be all security related.
> >
> > Tell you what - you convince the -stable team, and I'll go along with it..
>
>
> Better be "stable" and "base". 2.6.13.3 is the latest stable, 2.6.13
> is the latest base.

I think the idea of having the most recent "base release," and -stable, 
and -rc, and -git, are desirable, with some clear terms. Those of us who 
started with ftp and never felt the need for using a GUI have long since 
learned what to keep and where to find it, but I bet most people use the 
web by now.

--
   -bill davidsen (davidsen@xxxxxxx)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
 last possible moment - but no longer"  -me
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/