On 11/04/2012 04:50 PM, Denis Arnaud wrote: > Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2012 14:07:02 +0100 > Simon Lukasik <isimluk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Currently, each Fedora release is kept alive for 13(+/-) months. There >> were dozens of threads about shortening or prolonging period -- but I am >> not sure if something like the following has been ever discussed: >> Each N-th Fedora release -- where N%3==1 -- is alive for 7 months. >> Each N-th Fedora release -- where N%3==2 -- is alive for 7 months. >> Each N-th Fedora release -- where N%3==0 -- is alive for 19 months. >> >> Additionally, maintainers might be encouraged to push their system wide >> changes into N%3==1. As well as they might be encouraged to make the >> Fedora N%3==0 their best bread. >> > > +1 > Just to be sure I understand: when N%3==1 or N%3==2, Fedora N is no longer > supported as soon as Fedora N+1 is released, right? > Right. I am proposing to shorten that time, because otherwise it would force contributors to maintain 3-4 release. Which is, as we all know, no-go. > The N%3 seems a little bit like RedHat vs. Fedora to me, with a rolling > cycle of 6 Fedora releases rather than just 3. Indeed, AFAIU, every around > 6 Fedora releases, a new (LTS) RedHat release is cooked (Fedora 13 => > RedHat 6, Fedora 19 =>? RedHat 7). > Yep, there might be some similarity, but I don't see it as a bad thing. It may eventually strengthen the ecosystem. -- Simon Lukasik -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
