Fedora Core 5 Retirement
poelstra at redhat.com
Tue Jul 3 05:40:05 UTC 2007
Dave Jones said the following on 07/02/2007 09:32 PM Pacific Time:
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 01:41:47PM -0400, Warren Togami wrote:
> > As of Monday, July 2nd 2007, Fedora Core 5 has gone into retirement. No
> > further updates will be issued for FC5 or FE5 as we refocus our
> > developer attention to development of F8 and maintenance of our most
> > recent stable Fedora 7.
> > The Fedora Project now runs on a N+2 + 1 month support schedule. This
> > means the supported lifetime of FC5 was scheduled to end one month after
> > the release of F7. FC5 was supported from March 20th 2006 through July
> > 2nd 2007, or a good ~15.5 months.
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/Schedule
> > By the current Fedora 8 development schedule, the supported lifetime of
> > FC6 is to continue to a minimum of early December 2007.
> In the past, what happens to the still-open bugs against an EOL'd
> release has been decided by the individual package owner.
> I've seen..
> * Move all bugs to currently open release
> * Move all bugs to rawhide
> * Close bugs WONTFIX
> * "please upgrade" msg, NEEDINFO, wait a while, ->WONTFIX
> * Nothing, bugs left open, users left unaware that no fix is coming.
> all used as potential strategies for dealing with this, but it
> would be good to have a unified message. It would also probably
> be much faster for bugzilla admins to run some SQL query than
> each developer doing this by hand (last time I did it for the
> kernel, it took several hours for the 'change multiple bugs'
> thing to finish, with firefox actually timing out a few times).
I would very strongly vote in favor of: "WONTFIX; please reopen this bug against F7 if it still exists there."
>From one of the QA meetings a month or so back I took the action item to create a proposal for how to deal with bugzillas like this. I'll try to have something proposed on the wiki by the start of next week.
More information about the Fedora-maintainers