On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2016-10-25 at 17:59 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: >> 2. There doesn't appear to be a working process to get updates out >> quickly. As a current and pressing example, there is no build for >> Firefox 49.0.2. > > There isn't really a single 'security update process', no. Releasing > security updates is a package maintainer responsibility. I've seen > various people pontificating in various different places about why > there's no Firefox 49.0.2 build yet, but no-one seems to have taken the > rather obvious step of *asking the package maintainer*, or at least no- > one's done so and then posted the result rather than guessing about it. Fair enough. FWIW, I think that #1 and #3 are more severe than #2 in the sense that #2 is sporadic and there are various mechanisms that mostly work to notify maintainers about updates, whereas #1 and #3 are problematic even when the maintainer responds instantaneously. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
