Security updates

Luk Claes luk at
Fri Dec 29 10:56:02 UTC 2006

Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 09:50:22PM +0100, Mike Hommey <mh at> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 02:20:34AM -0800, Steve Langasek <vorlon at> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 01:40:37PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
>>>> I see Alex has uploaded version of icedove. What should we take
>>>> as a course of action for xulrunner, iceweasel and iceape ?
>>>> Should we go with newer upstreams (note there's no official xulrunner
>>>> release, but I fake them taking from tags in upstream cvs) or backport
>>>> security fixes ?
>>>> If the latter, alex, do you have a patch set for this ?
>>> Um, this is completely without context for me.  Is there something the
>>> release team is being asked to comment on?
>>> I don't care about version numbers of things you upload to unstable for
>>> etch, I only care about what shows up in a debdiff.  I think that policy is
>>> spelled out pretty clearly, or do you have questions about it?
>> To make it very clear : do you prefer security updates or new upstreams
>> (security updates + version change + minor functional changes) ?
> Considering there have been uploads of new upstreams for icedove and
> iceweasel, already... the question will actually be, will you refuse
> to push them in etch ?

A starting point would be packages of iceweasel and iceape that are ready to
migrate to etch... I personally prefer having working iceweasel and iceape
packages in etch soon...

It will probably depend on the 'minor' functional changes if we prefer the new
upstream or not, but that's only important after having the packages in etch



Luk Claes - - GPG key 1024D/9B7C328D
Fingerprint:   D5AF 25FB 316B 53BB 08E7   F999 E544 DE07 9B7C 328D

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url :

More information about the pkg-mozilla-maintainers mailing list