On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 07:56:48 -0600 Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > How about a slight variation on the fedora LTS plan that might vastly > reduce the needed work and let people keep running without the > dangers of going without security fixes? What if the versions > supported were the ones used as the base of the RHEL cuts, and the > subsequent updates were recompiled from the CentOS source RPM's? > There's a certain amount of incest or irony there, depending on how > you look at it, but isn't re-using work what free software is > supposed to be all about? > > In some cases you might need to re-enable some features removed in > RHEL (as CentosPlus does with the kernel) but the changes should all > be pretty obvious to someone with both source packages. And it would > be nice if additional feature-enabled packages made it into the > Centosplus repo in the cases where a fedora packager wanted to > maintain them. > > I could see why RH might oppose this for business reasons - but if > that's the case they should just say so. What's the point? Just the warm/fuzzy of being able to say "It's Fedora!" ? With EPEL you can get just about all the functionality you need, with a few minor exceptions. I'm not sure I get the point of rebuilding things again and pushing them out through a different update system. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
