Quoting Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Um, that's all we've BEEN doing is security fixes. Really, it should have been obvious to anybody that started using Legacy that one day we would stop supporting RHL9. If your product is in the hands of Legacy, perhaps it is time you start looking for a migration path. Plain and simple.
The talk when FL started was that RHL would be supported for a long time, specifically as long as there was interest in it. This was probably bad talk to be spreading, but it was what was being spread. Anyway, the concern was to keep RHL alive until there was a good migration path. That path has been arriving as of late. So it is reasonable to now talk about dropping RHL. But just because some migration paths are now available doesn't mean people have planned for the migration. So we need to be sensitive to that, and give people a warning that the time is now to plan for the migration, and you have X amount of time to accomplish it. I've stayed with RHL a lot longer than I thought I would because the migration path simply wasn't there at first, and wasn't well tested and debugged until recently. I've slowly been migrating to non-RHL versions, and I _have_ been bit by a few things (like NIS incompatibilies for example). There are other issues (for example a supported RHEL or clone install of 3.x now requires 256 MB of memory, which was not the case for RHL, so people may need to upgrade RAM and other things (disk partition sizes, etc). I think that most of the problems with migration have either been worked out or found out (usually with a work around) by now, so it isn't a tremendous problem like it was 2-3 years back. So now is a good time to drop RHL IMHO. In fact, I think it is important we think about forcing people to move from RHL to something else now, while the options for a semi-compatible upgrade are available. What I mean is, most distro's are quickly running towards the 2.6 kernel and its various OS changes, and making an upgrade from RHL to a 2.6 distro is a painful thing to do for a complex production system. So they need to be encouraged to do the less painful jump from RHL to a 2.4 kernel based distro now, while those 2.4 kernel systems are still available and supported. If we coddle them to long, when our RHL support does die, it will be a real problem migrating to a 2.6 based system for many folks. And if those folks are still running RHL at this time, they are not likely to pay for support or migration services. Hence, as much as it pains me to say so, now _is_ the time to address this issue. -- 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
