On 06/20/2014 02:25 PM, Trevor Hemsley wrote: > On 20/06/14 12:15, Johnny Hughes wrote: > > You think it is much easier to explain a data breach costing your client > > in the field millions dollars because someone THOUGHT they had 7.1 EUS > > and all its security updates, just like RHEL has, when the tree is at > > 7.3? We need to prevent people from thinking is OK to stay on an old > > tree, it absolutely is not. > The people who don't stay up to date are the ones who have never heard > of EUS and wouldn't know what it was if it bit them. They don't stay > up to date because they don't even know they should and adding an > incomprehensible date format to the release number won't make them do > so either. The addition of the motd telling you how many updates are > pending would do far more to address this than a random change to > something that doesn't need changing. > > It just adds confusion to the mix. > > T +1 on both aspects. telling how many updates are pending would be more useful by far than changing the naming scheme. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20140620/324572c5/attachment-0007.html>