On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 14:54 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 1/18/06, Toshio Kuratomi <toshio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > - Nitpick: There have been changes made to the EOL timeframe for at
> > least two of the three FC releases so saying "Always been _policy_"
> > isn't accurate. ("This is what's happened in all past releases" would
> > be more truthful.)
>
> Nitpick.. the start of the next testing cycle has flutuated, but the
> "policy" with regard to tying
> EOL to the test2 release was established before FC1 eol'd and has not
> changed at all since FC1 eol'd.
I guess I was confused by the announcements that the date of the FCX EOL
would be changed to the date of test2. I must have missed (or
forgotten) the fact that test2 had slipped so the date of EOL was being
changed from the old test2 date to the new one. Thanks to you and Jesse
for pointing it out.
-Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
