On Wednesday 15 November 2006 09:23, Matthew Miller wrote: >On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 10:06:57PM -0600, Eric Rostetter wrote: >> First I would like to say to those who say Fedora Legacy has failed, >> that it _did_ work (i.e. didn't fail) for the most critical time >> period and the most critical OS version (RHL 7-9, FC1). If it has >> failed, or is failing, it must not be forgotten that before it failed >> it worked exceedingly well. > >Or at least moderately well. Let's not over-sell. :) > >> Second, I'm fairly comfortable with saying that if FC goes to a 13 >> month support cycle, FL is basically not needed anymore. IMHO, people >> can upgrade once a year when presented with a known/documented release >> cycle, and known documented alternatives. > >One month of annual overlap is still a bit short. I can't help but agree that its too short. 3 or 6 would be much more realistic from the users viewpoint, who has his setup all fine tuned and doesn't want to go thru that on an annual basis. There are other things to life you know. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2006 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved. -- fedora-legacy-list mailing list fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
