From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Dec 17 17:11:40 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id RAA05704 for stable-outgoing; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 17:11:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id RAA05699 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 17:11:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.4/8.6.9) with ESMTP id RAA20353; Tue, 17 Dec 1996 17:11:21 -0800 (PST) To: Softweyr LLC cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: why is -stable not secure? In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 17 Dec 1996 17:07:27 MST." <199612180007.RAA14779@xmission.xmission.com> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1996 17:11:21 -0800 Message-ID: <20349.850871481@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-stable@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > Richard will be putting together (right, Richard? ;^) Once the > patches have been commited, Richard and his minions will distribute > source patches, and binaries for those who don't do sources, via > some mechanism yet to be specified. Well, I may frown somewhat at the idea of binaries going out unless they're generated in a very careful fashion, but I also think that asking people who want to track -stable to carry a src tree is a more than reasonable prerequisite. > Again, if you want to help, contact Richard via -stable. If you want Or even just contact Richard via Richard. :-) I don't think that -stable need necessarily follow every twisty mechanation of the BETA process if everyone is careful about announcing the end results. Jordan