OS Future now that Fedora Legacy defunct

[Anne Wilson]

On Thursday 21 December 2006 20:36, James Wilkinson wrote:
> Anne Wilson wrote:
> > You miss the point, Kevin. Of course you can upgrade on older systems
> > - if you want to. I've done it myself. I have two boxes, though, that
> > run FC4 and for several reasons I do not want to upgrade them. It's
> > just 10 months since FC4 was installed on both of them. I don't need
> > the latest and greatest on either of them, but I do want security
> > updates, and I'm not going to get them. Frankly, Legacy was the
> > biggest reason I had for coming to Fedora. I understand about the lack
> > of manpower in volunteer situations, but I'm less than happy. If I
> > have to install afresh to get a secure system I'll probably change to
> > CentOS rather than install FC6 on those boxes.
>
> For what it's worth, there is a current official proposal that security
> support should be extended to about thirteen months -- support for
> installing one release, missing the next completely, and then when the
> release *two* after you'd originally installed came out, you'd have a
> month to upgrade.
>
> See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraSummit/ReleaseProcess (at the
> bottom in bold) and
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2006-December/msg0009
>9.html and the following thread.
>
I like Rahul's proposal.  13 months is just not quite good enough, because it 
takes a few weeks after release to get everything settled down.  That could 
leave a server in a less than satisfactory situation for, say, a month.  
Doing it Rahul's way, servers could be updated annually, a few weeks after 
release time.

Anne
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20061222/fa1ec9e4/attachment-0001.sig>