On 11/18/18 2:29 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
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?
And why haven't these manufacturers already adopted CentOS which is
definitely around longer than 36-48 months?
--
Orion Poplawski
Manager of NWRA Technical Systems 720-772-5637
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane orion@xxxxxxxx
Boulder, CO 80301 https://www.nwra.com/
_______________________________________________
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
