On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 20:37 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > >On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 09:51 -0500, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > >>On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 12:56:20AM +1030, n0dalus wrote: > >> > >> > >>>Would it be possible for redhat to just extend security fixes for FCx > >>>until FC(x+2) comes out? I think if I was using an older release this > >>>is something I would really want. > >>> > >>> > >>The Fedora Legacy project already does that and does it rather well. Why > >>would it be any different if a Red Hat person was notionally doing it ? > >> > >> > > > >As I see it, it's "having to change your system to change it again a > >couple of months later". > > > > > > > We can fix that by enabling the repository by default or pushing out a > yum update that does it making the process completely transparent to the > end user. Will that do? For most, yes. > > > > >Another difference is marketing. "FC3 by RH" sounds differently than > >"FC3 by Legacy". > > > > > > > FC3 by Fedora Project really. > How about the "Fedora Support Project"? Gilboa -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
