<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Project Quant : Patch Management Cycle</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/security/archive/2009/04/30/project-quant-patch-management-cycle.aspx</link><description>Although we posted some of our initial thoughts, and have been getting some great feedback from everyone, Rich and I realized that we need a standard patch management cycle so that we can break apart the different parts of the project, so that they can</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>Jeff Jones Security Blog : Project Quant : Patch Management Cycle | Linux Affinity</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/security/archive/2009/04/30/project-quant-patch-management-cycle.aspx#3233790</link><pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 02:57:59 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3233790</guid><dc:creator>Jeff Jones Security Blog : Project Quant : Patch Management Cycle | Linux Affinity</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;PingBack from &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.linuxaffinity.com/?p=973"&gt;http://www.linuxaffinity.com/?p=973&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>