Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <grarpamp@gmail.com>) id 1SgOWX-00030t-E2
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 17 Jun 2012 23:04:49 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=74.125.82.175; envelope-from=grarpamp@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-we0-f175.google.com; 
Received: from mail-we0-f175.google.com ([74.125.82.175])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1SgOWW-00069k-E1
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Sun, 17 Jun 2012 23:04:49 +0000
Received: by werg55 with SMTP id g55so3717436wer.34
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Sun, 17 Jun 2012 16:04:42 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.207.27 with SMTP id m27mr6714551weo.42.1339974282191; Sun,
	17 Jun 2012 16:04:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.7.105 with HTTP; Sun, 17 Jun 2012 16:04:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgTHo0U+2U5vtbmTEiKB6rBHbfuRHsm-bcnRhSrs-2jZpw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD2Ti2_Z-mzHu_VG7fq+sgQj7CfdZ_nKoa7Q6nDObwBSL6yXgQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgQCc_-FgiXs0JABkAzZWNrbhhWYutvRgFLsnKYaEWDqwQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAD2Ti29+=L+ss7fwivy+gfPFuE10sQdy68TGhL-30ngWKTLdQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgTHo0U+2U5vtbmTEiKB6rBHbfuRHsm-bcnRhSrs-2jZpw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:04:42 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD2Ti28eC6A2+k8JfV3nXMLmye12K28rfCAorby87aXgV2ZGaQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.2 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
	sender-domain
	0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(grarpamp[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
	author's domain
	0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
	not necessarily valid
	-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
	0.4 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1SgOWW-00069k-E1
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.6.x - detachdb in wrong place
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 23:04:49 -0000

>> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
>> https://git.gitorious.org/bitcoin/bitcoind-stable
>
> The latter is Luke's backports of security and stability fixes to
> otherwise unmaintained old versions.

Ah ok, coming from cvs/svn, it's a bit different to find things.
There's something to be said for maintenance of pior branches.
Though I see some things I can use in github and my work would
be more useful there, so maybe I'll stwitch to that from gitorius/0.6.x.

Presumably the github/0.6.2 branch is safe for production?

What degree of caution about wallet eating should be
made for those using github/master?