The only thing to think about with FC1, perhaps, is that it is the last 2.4 kernel release (unless FC2 offers a substitute 2.4. kernel). For many, going to the 2.6 kernel at this time is not a viable option. Reasons include wanting to let it be out there for a while to see what is and is not broken. In our case, we use a filesystem called Openafs. The 2.6 kernel completely broke openafs. I won't get into the politics of the situation, but if we were to go to a fedora core relase, it would have to be FC1. I wonder if you will find that there is support for a release like FC1 a la rh7.3 as compared to the other FC releases. On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 04:25:50PM -0700, Howard Owen wrote: > > That makes sense. So effectively we add a year to the support lifetime of > the Fedora Core releases. > > I also see why dropping two lesser used releases makes arithmetic sense. > > On Thu, 20 May 2004, Jesse Keating wrote: > > > On Thursday 20 May 2004 16:08, Howard Owen wrote: > > > I know you've thought about what it will mean to support three > > > releases a year, *every year*. > > > > > > How about picking just one a year? > > > > Not 3. 2. Every 4 to 6 months, and the way I've seen things go (from > > the inside) we're going to be pretty close to just 2 a year. Fedora > > Legacy will only support 2 FC releases at a time. So when FC1 goes > > EOL, we support it, and when FC2 goes EOL, we support it. When FC3 > > goes eol, we no longer support FC1, just FC2 and FC3. So on and so > > forth. > > > > > > -- > Howard Owen "Even if you are on the right > EGBOK Consultants track, you'll get run over if you > hbo@xxxxxxxxx +1-650-218-2216 just sit there." - Will Rogers > > > -- > > fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list -- ******************************** David William Botsch Consultant/Advisor II CCMR Computing Facility dwb7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ******************************** -- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
