Eric Rostetter wrote: > For 8.0, the argument is standard business practices. (Which would > mean not supporting 7.2, BTW). Standard practice is to support the > last "dot release" of the last X releases. So if X was 3, that > would be RH 9, 8.0, and 7.3. If X was 4, that would be RH 9, 8.0, > 7.3, and 6.2. And so on. In theory, if X was 2, we would do RH 9 > and 8.0, not RH 9 and 7.3... Well, for me RHL9 is just a misnumbered 8.1 (see the numbering of it's beta). So 7.3 and 9 make sense. But the real question is: Who will do the work? If there are enough volunteers, then 8.0 should be supported. If not, 8.0 *cannot* be supported. I volunteer for helping with QA for 7.3, and I would like to learn, so that I'm able to help with buildimg as well. Best regards, Martin Stricker -- Homepage: http://www.martin-stricker.de/ Linux Migration Project: http://www.linux-migration.org/ Red Hat Linux 9 for low memory: http://www.rule-project.org/ Registered Linux user #210635: http://counter.li.org/
