Fedora Board Recap 2007-NOV-13

[Jesse Keating]

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 18:28:52 +0100
Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip at kanarip.com> wrote:

> On the other hand you rely on downstream to tell you when it is OK
> for them to have you purge the binary (as well as the sources) all
> and all not making it very manageable or even sustainable in the long
> run. Committing to provide the sources for a given period of time
> however let's you crontab a 'find -exec', leaving any "real
> responsibility" to downstream; far more efficient and way more
> manageable for us, good enough for anyone else.

No, I rely on the downstream to either purge their release themselves,
either by replacing it with a newer one, or having it autopurged at a
time agreed upon when accepting the donated hosting.  The key is tying
the removal of the binary release with the removal of the source
release.

I suppose we could be less helpful and just say we're going to host the
source you used for $bla time, after that you're SOL, but I'm trying to
be a bit more helpful.

> 
> BTW, these interim updates, builds or even CVS commits are not
> released effectively -like you said they are never included in any
> binary distribution. I'm thinking these got included in the bigger
> picture somehow, while I was just talking about released updates
> (possibly including updates-testing) -nothing more, not even
> development/.

I was talking about released (or -testing) updates that were never
included in any respin.  They went out as an update, then later was
replaced by a newer update, without any respin coming along and using
them.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20071121/63f89e18/attachment.sig>