Preferential notice of new versions
J Bacher
jb at jbacher.com
Sun Feb 4 23:00:02 UTC 2001
On Sun, 4 Feb 2001, Dan Busarow wrote:
> On Feb 4, J Bacher wrote:
> >1) Noone has suggested that the current public distribution would go
> >away. What has been a point of concern is that the public may have to
> >wait [too long?] for vendors to get their act together and publish patches
> >before the new release hits the general distribution. A good many
> >companies don't rely on vendor patches.
>
> And since I have the source I am limited in what way?
> Paul has't changed anything the I can see aside from formalizing
> deals with the root operators. That's a good thing
Well, that's exactly my thought. From what I gather, the concern seems to
be that there would be a delay in releasing the source to the general
public until the vendors got their patches. My take is that the
pre-release to the vendors afforded time for testing compatibility
issues -- not that there would be a delay in releasing the source to the
general public once ISC was satisfied that the code would behave as
expected.
That's why I called for a clarification. I think that the panic may be
uncalled for. However, I also haven't seen anyone provide clarification
to dissuade any concern.
More information about the NANOG
mailing list