RE: [cobalt-users] PHP Upgrades

["Greg O'Lone" <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cobalt-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:cobalt-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Bruce Timberlake
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 9:09 PM
> To: cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [cobalt-users] PHP Upgrades
> 
> 
> > I guess my point was...why didn't they just give us 4.3.1?
> 
> It involves a lot more work (and time) to do an entire 
> baseline upgrade, 
> rather than backporting fixes into "known good" code.  That's 
> why a lot 
> of Cobalt apps appear out of date and trip low-quality vulnerability 
> scanners that just check an RPM version, etc.
> 
> Not saying I agree with the "policy" -- I'd like to see 
> everything kept 
> as up-to-date as is reasonably possible -- but at least I 
> understand why 
> they do what they do.
> 
> What would be "perfect" is if the download page and/or BlueLinQ info 
> screen contained an actual changelog instead of just saying "upgrades 
> PHP"... that way you could look and see "it _says_ 4.0.6 but it's 
> equivalent in updates (note - that's different from 
> functionality!) to a 
> new 4.3.1 install"
> 

Bruce-

Actually I have immense respect for you (and the original Cobalt team)
for taking on such a project as the RaQ product line. Something that I
can't see myself trying for a long time to come. It's been one of those
days, ya know. I upgraded a box with the latest patch before getting
feedback from the list and had to start over from scratch (thank G*d it
wasn't our main production machine!).

Greg