Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 12:26:49AM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > On Jan 25, 2008 12:08 AM, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Unless I am wrong new builds aren't allowed for EOL releases. And I also > > > guess that at some point mirrors are shut down. Not doing those 2 things > > > would really allow for a fedora LTS. > > > > Until someone comes up with a sound plan for an LTS deliverable that > > communicates expectations on quality, I don't see a reason to just > > open up the trees for random people to update random packages whenever > > they want to. > > Random packages, maybe, but not random people, please. The "non-random" people are in short supply... > And there should not be any quality expectation just like for fedora > itself. What is the point then? "Come, run FLTS, a slowly rotting heap of bits kept on long-term (on and off) life support just because" doesn't sound too inviting... Besides, Fedora users /have/ quality expectations. Perhaps somewhat lower than RHEL; and aiming in a different direction, so they are different just by that. -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 2654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 2654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 2797513 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
