On 09/07/2015 06:52 AM, Miloslav Trmac wrote:
[snip]
Oh I’m not at all suggesting that the Fedora universe should not be
self-hosting, or that this self-hosting property should not be
regularly verified by mass rebuilds or the like.
I just wanted to say that that having various /subsets/ of the Fedora
universe, and especially the by-definition-smallest ring 0 or its
immediate superset, self hosting, is vastly complicating matters and I
don’t see a benefit to it.
Mirek
Let's say ring 0 isn't self hosting, but ring 0 + 1 ring is. Can we
offer a longer term of support for ring 0 than ring 1? What happens
when a bug in ring 0 requires a fix in ring 1, but the support window
for ring 1 has closed? That's the main thing that's worrying about a
free-for-all with self hosting.
--
Brendan Conoboy / RHEL Development Coordinator / Red Hat, Inc.
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
