<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
On 06.08.2017 00:33, Ralph Seichter wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:ff39bbb6-0efe-8ceb-7f53-c8ee60efff65@horus-it.de">
<pre wrap="">On 06.08.17 00:08, Chad MILLER wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Careful. 0.3.0.1 > 0.2.9.14orsomething, but the former is probably
too buggy.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
I fail to see how that relates to my earlier message. When a new Tor
production version is released, it is by definition recommended, or it
would not be a production release in the first place. If later it turns
out that a particular Tor version is buggy, in can be manually removed
from the list of recommended versions.
-Ralph</pre>
</blockquote>
I’m not sure if “production version/release” is a term formally
defined for Tor releases, but 0.3.0.1 was at least not a “stable”
release: the announcement of Tor 0.3.0.6 [1] declares it “the first
stable release of the Tor 0.3.0 series”. And indeed, on the
consensus health page [2], I can see that several directory
authorities don’t recommend any Tor versions between 0.2.9.* and
0.3.0.7 (0.3.0.6 had a “medium-severity security bug” [3], I assume
that’s why it’s not recommended either).<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Lucas<br>
<br>
[1]:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-announce/2017-April/000128.html">https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-announce/2017-April/000128.html</a><br>
[2]: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://consensus-health.torproject.org/">https://consensus-health.torproject.org/</a><br>
[3]:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-announce/2017-May/000129.html">https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-announce/2017-May/000129.html</a><br>
</body>
</html>