[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJaF1O1MgrT95nbE1QoYvr=BiQ-3=zts_h91rBs68=uPSO_Fjg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 16:56:45 +0100
From: shane Shane <shane@...twareontheside.info>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: 1.7.9-jumbo-8 release?
I say release it even there isn't a big fuss made about it, there's a lot
of work in there which won't get out until bleeding is stable, hell the
only reason I started developing on the project was because unstable was
much better suited for my purposes than jumbo-7.
Regards
Shane
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com
> wrote:
> On 05/30/2013 10:55 AM, magnum wrote:
> > On 30 May, 2013, at 10:49 , Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@...il.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Frank Dittrich
> >> <frank_dittrich@...mail.com> wrote:
> >>> On 05/30/2013 10:41 AM, Frank Dittrich wrote:
> >>>> When do we release 1.7.9-jumbo-8?
> >>>
> >>> Now that John the Ripper 1.8.0 has been released, we can probably
> >>> release 1.7.9-jumbo-8-junstable as 1.7.9-jumbo-8, and make bleeding the
> >>> new unstable, and aim for a 1.8.0-jumbo-1.
> >>>
> >>> Otherwise we won't need to release a 1.7.9-jumbo-8 at all.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I am in favour of *not* releasing 1.7.9-jumbo-8 at all.
> >
> > I'm in favor of releasing it semi-silently with little-to-none
> additional testing. It is well tested.
>
> Because it is well tested and currently much more stable than bleeding,
> I am also in favor of just releasing it.
>
> We shouldn't put more work into 1.7.9-jumbo-8.
> But we also shouldn't just "throw away" what we have done so far.
> We may announce that we aim to release a 1.8.0-jumbo-1 soon (but who
> knows how long that will take).
>
> Frank
>
>
Content of type "text/html" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
