On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:24:25 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > Fedora LTS would compete with CentOS+EPEL and would lead > > to even more mass-builds. > > We are back to what IMO, this all obits around: questioning the > "will" :/ Yes, I question the number of people with such a "will". Because the situation has changed. You cannot hope to win back any volunteers who have switched to CentOS, where a lot is easier to do -- also with regard to trademark issues. Updates can be copied from RHEL verbatim. You don't need to duplicate Red Hat's security team. Instead, you simply rely on it. There are no promises to fix bugs in CentOS until they are fixed in RHEL. CentOS is the road of least resistance for community volunteers. Fedora Legacy, on the other hand, was willing to sink its own ship while still in the harbour. That made it even easier for volunteers to find an excuse when wandering off, blaming the bureaucracy and insufficient infrastructure. If as many hurdles as possible had been removed, only then the project would have managed to find out whether there would have been enough volunteers to increase the life-time of a few distributions for N months and deal with every vulnerability in every package, also the big ones. For RHL it was possible to copy/port patches from their corresponding RHEL packages. For Fedora, you are in version upgrade hell. Perhaps a dry-run with Fedora 6 or 7 would tell. Get somebody to find out what security fixes would need to be published for those dists. This could happen in parallel with building a SIG, filled with people with strong interest in doing lots of thankless work and being held liable for mistakes later on, too. I think you will find out that you would benefit from or be in need of corporate backing (as not to duplicate a lot of work). -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
