Quoting Michal Jaegermann <michal@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
I never tried to imply that automatic "version chase" is a good thing, and is definitely bad in case of libraries, but there are situations when you simply do not have a choice. Avoiding security updates because you do not want to change versions is in general not an option.
Exactly what I'm am saying. Now we just need consensus on what situations call for which method. To me, the existing methods are fine. Jesse raised the question of should we change it. I answered him honestly and simply. Then I replied to a bunch of other post, in which I took an extreme position to the conservative side, for no other reason than to counter the many extreme positions to the liberal. Kind of Devil's Advocate if you will.
I also think that for systems where you really want a long-term stable software base you should use nowadays distros like RHEL, or "clones" like CentOS, and for other pushing them far beyond EOL quickly becomes more trouble then it is worth.
Then why not just end the FL project? But seriously, it isn't just pushing them far beyond EOL. It is pushing them just slightly beyond EOL in many cases. I don't care if FC3 is pushed for more than 6 months. I just want some time to schedule an upgrade, not an indefinate lifetime.
Michal
-- Eric Rostetter The Department of Physics The University of Texas at Austin Go Longhorns! -- fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
