Fedora Legacy Launch Plan (draft 2)

[Chuck Wolber]

> I believe we can sanely and easily choose naming on a case-by-case
> basis.  We only need to follow precedent.  This is not a problem.

Wouldn't the precedent be the existing rh7.3, rh8.0, rh9 tags?


> We disagree about having ".legacy" at the end.  I personally don't see a
> problem in having a longer filename since it *should* be handled
> automatically by tools.  I believe we should have it for two reasons:
> 
> 1) Clear separation between the official RH/FC updates and Legacy updates.

Ok, I can understand that. But instead of legacy, why not flrh7.3, 
flrh8.0, flrh9?


> 2) Repository tags are encouraged for all non-FC and non-FE repositories.

Yup


> I suppose we could have a shorter abbreviation of legacy, but I can't
> think of anything that looks good.

Shorter is good, but I'm still lobbying heavily for some semblance of 
which RH OS the RPM was meant for in the filename.

-Chuck


-- 
Quantum Linux Laboratories - ACCELERATING Business with Open Technology
   * Education			| -=^ Ad Astra Per Aspera ^=-
   * Integration		| http://www.quantumlinux.com
   * Support			| chuckw at quantumlinux.com

"You know what you get after putting 30 years into a company? You're
 looking at it." -Downsized CIO of a major insurance carrier.