Getting FE security (team/sig) moving / on the road

[Jesse Keating]

On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 14:59 +0100, Stefan Neufeind wrote:
> - How about joining forces with Fedora Legacy? As I am subscribed to
> both mailinglists, I see they would also favor a closer cooperation with
> Fedora/Fedora Extras in various ways. Maybe the effort of backporting
> fixes could be coordinated with them? (Though I understand they will
> usually have a lot harder time to backport fixes :-) ) 

Members of my team are on this list so that we can all coordinate in how
we treat security within Fedora.  With Core, I see that backporting
isn't as important as in say older RHL releases or RHEL.  Some amount of
churn that happens to fix issues is expected, but to what degree?  We've
been struggling with thins in Legacy space too.  It would be good to
have a unified front in how we treat security updates across the Fedora
board.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-security-list/attachments/20060306/91ea723b/attachment.sig>