[Snort-sigs] [Emerging-Sigs] [Snort-devel] Snort 2.9.0.1 Now Available

Russ Combs rcombs at ...435...
Wed Nov 3 21:15:30 EDT 2010


On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 9:08 PM, waldo kitty <wkitty42 at ...3507...> wrote:

> On 11/3/2010 10:54, Joel Esler wrote:
>
>> This is for /rules/, remember.  Current version, and one back is the
>> standard.
>> We'll take a look at the life cycle, wording, and policy on the website to
>> see
>> if any modifications need to be made to clarify anything.
>> We can't bring the 2.9.0 or 2.9.0.1 improvements back to 2.8.x.  2.9.0 was
>> a big
>> rewrite of the stream model (and many other things) and bringing back the
>> code
>> to 2.8 would, as I said, be a monumental undertaking.  That's why 2.9 was
>> released.
>>
>
> with the major changes that 2.9 brought, it really should have been 3.0...
> i never have understood the aversion to two digit minor, subminor and
> subsubminor numbering with snort... some stuff could easily have been
> X.2.15.3 or such... this numbering stuff is one of the things, as i see it,
> that is causing problems with supporting older versions and being able to
> backport some fixes... yes, i know... i've been there a few times myself and
> in the middle of such now but there are ways to handle it when necessary...
>
> several of my projects are current stuck at 2.8.6.1 with NO WAY to move
> forward due to the forced updates in certain sources that snort has gone...
> it bites huge uglies and many of my clients are extremely upset... you don't
> hear it but i sure do :( :( :(
>

What, specifically, are the "forced updates in certain sources" you are
referring to?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.snort.org/pipermail/snort-sigs/attachments/20101103/e0c56803/attachment.html>


More information about the Snort-sigs mailing list