[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: long term support release

Jesse Keating wrote:

Yes, it would be a big win for the fedora 'brand' perception to make
it actually usable instead of just a rolling alpha/beta for RHEL.  If
you are going to argue that such a perception shouldn't exist, just
say so instead of claiming that it's too hard or that failed earlier
attempts prove it can't be done.

I think there would be some value to having CentOS associated with the
Fedora brand...

I believe the CentOS team has made some effort to isolate/generalize the 'rebranding' work they have to do. It might be easy to replace with fedora's even if they aren't interested in converging.

Now for a *really* warm/fuzzy about the free
software community, you could just converge this version's update
repo with the corresponding EPEL/centos/centosplus repo contents and
make them end up the same without a re-install or any duplication of
infrastructure at all.

Now you're talking about something different, a migration plan for
Fedora -> EL based on said release.

It's not necessarily different, depending on what you imagined a fedora with LTS would be like. Having a centosplus-like kernel would be a key factor so as not to break on hardware or filesystems that RHEL doesn't support.

That I could see some great value
in, and it shouldn't be too difficult to start working down this path,
and getting into the heads of the EL creators that this is something
we'd like to see made possible, rather than difficult, by the EL

Sounds like a SIG to me...

Going this direction will probably emphasize the already-existing need for an additional/optional variation of an EPEL-like repo that has newer replacement apps for RHEL/Centos. These are separate but equal needs. That is, some situations will require/prefer the frozen versions and feature set of the enterprise distro, but many, perhaps most, would really like to have a current firefox and openoffice without replacing their kernel and device drivers on working systems. The scheme that would make sense to me would be to make the update switch to 'stable mode' at end of life by default, retaining the app versions supported in the enterprise disto since this takes essentially no extra effort, and concentrate new volunteer effort on building current 'fedora-version' apps that could optionally be installed over the enterprise base. If the latter effort fails, you've still got a solid, working version.

  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell gmail com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]