On Friday 25 January 2008 11:05:29 am seth vidal wrote: > On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 21:42 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Emmanuel Seyman wrote: > > > * Patrice Dumas [25/01/2008 16:48] : > > >> I thought you were speaking about RHEL. But Centos is exactly in the > > >> same case that 'fedora LTS' or fedora itself. Volunteers, no warranty, > > >> no contract. > > > > > > CentOS doesn't actually do the work of backporting security fixes only. > > > They take the work done by Red Hat and just rebuild the .rpms. > > > > > > If Fedora LTS happens, it will not have this option. > > > > .. unless Fedora LTS is a rebuild of RHEL SRPMS. There might be some > > advantages to this worth considering. > > do we need another centos but with a fedora brand? I think the centos > guys are doing a good job, personally. I believe the trick is to just have the CentOS folks rename CentOS to Fedora LTS and otherwise just keep on doing what they've been doing... :) -- Jarod Wilson jwilson@xxxxxxxxxx -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
