Quoting Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
This still sucks developer time to backport fixes (for things that don't
really rebuild) and even though it's "unsupported" it's still coming from
Fedora Legacy and thus expected to be good.
Wasn't AS 2.1 built off RHL 7.2? So wouldn't the patches be fairly easy
to come by in most cases? I think that was the argument before...
No such argument for RHL 8.0 though. It is different enough that backporting
patches is non-trivial.
Also we can't hit every
update, so I would feel not so good about missing some security stuff.
Why not? I don't think there is anything in 7.2 that isn't in 7.3, is
there? And if 7.2 does follow AS 2.1, then it should be pretty easy
to track...
If we're going to turn off 7.2/8.0 it's going to be complete. I'd leave
the directory trees up there, but nothingmore would be added.
Not arguing that, just think we should discuss both options before we decide.
My memory is a little vague as to the AS 2.1 tracking though, so correct
me if I'm wrong...
--
Eric Rostetter
--
fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
