RFC: Fedora Extras EOL Policy

Patrice Dumas pertusus at free.fr
Fri Apr 14 22:10:27 UTC 2006

On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 10:50:55AM -0400, Ed Hill wrote:
> -1, I strongly disagree based upon end-user expectations
> I vote for consistency.  That is, all packages within both FE and FC are

Me too. Package before and after eol are handled similarly. Consistency
for packagers is as important as consistency for users. And the consistency
is a relative concept. I am for consistency between what is done for FE
and FE eol. Some users might even have the same expectations than me.

> eol-ed more-or-less simultaneously and are treated in a very similar
> manner.  The overall trend here seems to be a convergence (or a blurring
> of the distinctions between) of FE and FC.  Having different eol policy

But there is a sharp distinction between fedora legacy and fedora core. 
The rules are completly different and completly different than those from
extras. This is as difficult to explain than why the fedora legacy and
fedora core are different. I have seen users complaining loudly in fedora
legacy lists that the packages weren't updated.

> and/or practice within FE/FC (or different expectations on a per-package
> basis as Patrice suggests) is, IMO, a lot of confusion for very little
> gain.

It is not what I suggest: it is the current practice in fedora extras. 
And it is right. I don't think it makes sense to force packagers to 
act such that they fulfill the users expectations, because there are 
many users with many expectations just like there are many different 
packages in extra that fulfill very different needs.

> Expectations regarding bug/security fixes, updates, and other changes
> should (in an ideal world) to be communicated loudly, clearly, simply,
> and *consistently* to all end users.  Muddying the waters with different
> per-package or per-repo or per-whatever behavior is not helpful.

Having a fedora extras eol that works differently than fedora extras is
muddying the waters. At some points I wanted to contribute to fedora 
legacy, thinking that it was more or less similar with fedora core or 
fedora extras but it is completly different. It is not an issue for 
fedora core vs legacy as these are different peoples (redhat/community) 
different infrastructures. But I don't think it is right for fedora extras 
vs fedora extras eol as these are the same people and same infrastructure.
And fedora extras is allready very inhomogenous.


More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list