On 8/4/06, Christian Iseli <Christian.Iseli@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Taking a-d into account, I see a reasonable case to take
advantage of FL security fixes for those maintainers still interested
in maintaining packages for old FE releases. It's far from perfect,
but I think it's better than not using FL.
+1. It seems to me that running a core release once passed over to
legacy w/o legacy updates is akin to using a current core release and
disabling the updates repo.
The main problems I see:
- users need to subscribe to FL. IMHO, the proper solution is to add
FL packages to the FC updates like would seem natural. But that's not
FESCo's call. FAB maybe ?
One idea -- just brainstorming here -- would be for the last
core-released update to a distro going legacy to install & enable the
legacy yum repos.
- some FE maintainers don't want to maintain old releases. IMHO,
co-maintainership should help in that case. Or maybe the security SIG,
but they probably have enough on their plate already.
Personal opinion here: maintainers/packagers aren't making a lifetime
commitment to keeping extras packages for legacy distros up to date.
(That being said, I'll probably try to respond to
security-related/critical issues with mine.) Co-maintainers
(including SIGs acting as such), or maintainers for legacy branches,
can help out significantly here.
-Chris
--
Chris Weyl
Ex astris, scientia
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
