On 9/8/05, James Yonan <j...@yonan.net> wrote: > On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Leonard Isham wrote: > > > On 9/8/05, James Yonan <j...@yonan.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Leonard Isham wrote: > > > > > > > On 9/8/05, James Yonan <j...@yonan.net> wrote: > > > > > [snip] > > > > Please bear with a network geek's rambling for a minute. > > > > 1. There is a windows install available. > > Yes. > > > 2. the tar file can become an RPM with RPMBuild, correct? > > Yes. > > > I'd have to deal with: > > > > 1. Disabling openvpn updates via yum. > > 2. This is a branch that will not be "merged" back in until 2.1 beta. > > 3. 2.0.3 or other updates will not include this unless I figure out > > how to "merge/diff" the patch in, and that may break it. > > > > I to go with it, but not being a developer fear that not being able to > > merge patches and even complie for windows... > > I plan to treat the "TO" (topology-supporting) branch as a beta series > until the 2.1 beta series formally begins -- that means it will be > updated, changes from the 2.0.x branch will get merged in, and when I make > releases, there will always be a .tar.gz, .zip, and Windows installer > .exe. >
OK than I have to decide if I'll use beta in production. Don't get me wrong I respect the quality of your beta releases more than most others. I have OpenVPN RCs in production, but I don't know about beta... -- Leonard Isham, CISSP Ostendo non ostento.
