On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 16:01 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 18:57 -0400, David Curry wrote: > > Before gravitating elsewhere, though, I will offer an opinion. > > Unless > > there is a restrictive covenent in Red Hat's support of Fedora Legacy > > that limits updates to "security" and "trivial" patches, there is > > reason > > to consider broadening "updates policy" somewhat beyond security > > only. > > Fedora Legacy updates policy and willingness of the community to > > support > > Fedora Legacy are not independent of one another. However the issue > > is > > resolved I wish the group well. > > A) more man power is needed > > B) more things can break, and thats not acceptable to the people who are > using Fedora / Red Hat in a longer term than what Red Hat itself > supports. > > If you need an OS that has a long life span and gets some feature and > non-security bugfixing over time, please look at Red Hat Enterprise > Linux or the plethora of free rebuilds of it. That would be nice except for one thing, these distributions check the bios for newness and when it is not sufficiently new installation of these becomes a big problem. On the other hand, RH7.3 is stable but does need to support more modern apps. I would encourage the powers that be at Fedora Legacy to consider keeping this one release as current as possible as it is one of the few that can work on old hardware which is likely found in basements and the third world. > -- G. Roderick Singleton <gerry@xxxxxxxxxxxx> PATH tech -- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
