Let's get moving

[Eric Rostetter]

Quoting Matt Nuzum <matt.followers at gmail.com>:

> Sorry if this sounds a bit like a rant, it's really not.  It strikes
> me that FLP is a short-term project to help people transition into one
> of the more long-term linux solutions.

No, it is a long term project, to last as long at least as long as
Fedora Core lasts plus some after that.

> For those who like to be on the edge and use FC, FLP is of no use and
> they probably don't subscribe to this list.

Yes, it is of use to them.  For example, we can only upgrade between
school semesters.  FC releases don't usually happen on that schedule.
So we need to FL to hold us over on the old release until we can upgrade
to the new one, at a minimum.

> I suggest that FLP create time-lines for which people can expect
> support.  RH 7.x (x>=1) came out in 2001, right?  How long does the
> community want to support it?

For as long as there is community support.  This is all in the web site
and FAQ, which apparently you have not read.

> BTW, I would like to see TAO, WhiteBox and CentOS merge into one and
> pool their resources.  Unless I see a stronger community arise I will
> consider these to be less supported even than FC.

I think CentOS is well supported by the community.  TAO and WhiteBox are
of course a whole different story.
 
> Just some food for thought,

But none of it agrees with the purpose or intent of FL, so it really
doesn't help in any way.

> --
> Matthew Nuzum | Makers of "Elite Content Management System"
> www.followers.net | View samples of Elite CMS in action
> matt at followers.net | http://www.followers.net/portfolio/

-- 
Eric Rostetter