<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Patrice Dumas wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:20081221140507.GD2791@free.fr" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 07:54:31AM +0100, Tim Lauridsen wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">So, over to the experts who actually build Fedora. Does the idea have merit? </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap="">This has been discussed many time on the list, the problem is that you cant have it both ways, you cant have a LTS release with the latest and greatest. The only way a LTS release make sence is to freeze the code, test, test and test. And then backport security related fixes. RHEL/Centos does this well and Fedora does the latest and greatest part. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> It is untrue. You can have a distribution which begins with the latest and greatest but is gradually stabilizing. You didn't read this proposal, did you? It has been retired, but you saw the discussions, don't you? <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pertusus/Draft_keeping_infra_open_for_EOL">https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pertusus/Draft_keeping_infra_open_for_EOL</a> -- Pat </pre> </blockquote> No, i did not read then proposal and i read just read some of the discussion, these kind of threads quickly turns into a long pissing contest and I loose interest. IMO you have 2 nice choices in Fedora and Centos/RHEL and trying to put something in the middle is just wasting limited resources. But it is just my opion, you have another one, that is you right :) Tim </body> </html>