Security updates are too slow or none existant

[Vincent]

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 03:15:27 +0100
Bart Martens <bart.martens at chello.be> wrote:

> On Sun, 2004-02-08 at 02:42, Vincent wrote:
> > I agree, the security fixes have been horrid and confusing. I don't expect
> > Red Hat to take this problem up as actively as they do for RHEL.
> (...)
> > I suspect they are
> > working on ways to get more community involvement but policies are on the back burner
> > at the moment or being worked on at a lower precedence to other issues. When Red Hat 
> > gets some guidelines together on how and what they want from us I think pieces
> > will start coming together.
> 
> So your point is to give rh some time to get things organized. I can
> agree on that for the enhancements and the minor bug fixes. But I think
> rh should release security updates for rh9 and fc1 simultaneously, as
> long as the community has not yet taken over this work.
> 
> 

Yes but RHEL is thier product so I do not expect them to have FC 1 to be as important to them as RHEL. It encourages mission critical users to pay for a product instead of a free one. Not saying its thier policy, or that its right. Just that its possible and personally if it were true I would not blame them. That is why I think a policy put in place for US to get the errata supplied would be more efficient. Only cause its OUR #1 priority unlike it is to them.
(just talking again, sorry if i'm full of it)