<#secure method=pgp mode=sign> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Adi Linden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> If you're satisfied with the existing feature set, are new features >> really anywhere near as important as security fixes? Particularly >> when it comes to production servers? > > New features aren't important at all. It is all about maintaining the > current state of a server while keeping it secure on a hostile network. > And with the least amount of effort, where security updates do not break > anything... OK, then don't worry about the release cycle. What you get on security.debian.org should get what you need done until the next release. >> Not long after the next Stable happens, because it's not hard to >> upgrade in Debian. 18 months seems about average, IIRC. > > This means that for longest possible support I should be looking at > deploying Sarge, not Woody. How timely are security issues addressed in a > Sarge? Given that you're the one supporting it, which are you willing to support? Right now, your safest bet is still woody, though sarge has regular, near-daily updates (which can get annoying), as it is still, essentially, in beta. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBYis4UzgNqloQMwcRAou+AJ0ai2CMEQwwBontVDZexzmgtfahFQCfVqgf bg/yxD3KfLGIupRxNaUXndA= =IAxf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
