reviving Fedora Legacy

[Martin Langhoff]

On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:
>> open?  Without a firm timeline on when to close a branch.. will we
>> ever see a branch close?
>
> Why would we want to? Just let things going as long as there is at least one
> maintainer committing something. Even if not all security issues get fixed,
> it's better than if none gets fixed.

I don't think anyone would sign up as a user for such "support". LTS
is about a fairly specific promise that is very hard to commit to.

The work I am doing would definitely benefit from having some Fedora
releases turn into LTS, even if it's perhaps for clearly defined a
subset of packages. What Ubuntu does with it's LTS is hard for the
distro team but is excellent for "users" (re-spinners) like OLPC.

At the moment, it's not clear to me (perhaps because I haven't read
the appropriate doco...)

 - Which Fedora release becomes the base for the next RH/CentOS release.
 - How I transition my userbase from Fedora support to CentOS support at EOL

So I think it is a fair expectation to be able to "follow" a Fedora
release into its RH/CentOS stabilisation, knowing that the process
exists and that the stable branches are published. It definitely works
for other distros. Perhaps it's possible with Fedora -- hints and
pointers welcome.

But I would not sign up for the "whatever" support plan some people
are suggesting -- how the hell do I plan for it? Ah, some things might
get patched, some might not, and we won't know or tell in advance.

cheers,



m
-- 
 martin.langhoff at gmail.com
 martin at laptop.org -- School Server Architect
 - ask interesting questions
 - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
 - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff