Re: Fedora Lifecycles: imagine longer-term possibilities

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>>>>> "IU" == Iñaki Ucar <iucar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

IU> In this respect (the kernel), it's true that something changed
IU> compared to a decade ago: there was no LTS support upstream
IU> then. Now, there is.

That is not really true.  2.6.16 (the first kernel that I recall anyone
calling some equivalent of "LTS") was released 12.5 years ago, while FC5
was fresh.  I do recall its existence being considered in the
discussions that happened in the FC6 timeframe, though I wasn't involved
in all of those.  It was a very interesting time with the core-extras
merge and the community finally having a say in the maintenance of every
piece of the distro.  Obviously the release cadence and lifecycle was a
big topic.

 - J<
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux