I'm not for or against a longer Fedora lifecycle, but I think we need a stronger statement of what the problem is we're trying to address. >From your email: On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 06:36:38PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > But there are some good cases for a longer lifecycle. For one thing, > this has been a really big blocker for getting Fedora shipped on > hardware. Second, there are people who really could be happily running > Fedora but since we don't check the tickbox, they don't even look at us > seriously. I'd love to change these things. To do that, we need > something that lasts for 36-48 months. this sounds like a very valid problem. But if this was fixed, what number of manufacturers would adopt Fedora and how many installations do they ship (eg per year)? Could it be fixed in another way, like a special OEM Fedora release? Is this the only problem that we're trying to solve or are there others? Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top _______________________________________________ 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
