On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 11:04:22 +0100 Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello, > > I thought about a plan regarding Updates After End of Life (UAEL, > temporary name for the project). I think that first we should make > sure that all the packages in the comps groups 'Core' and 'Base' that > are not optional + kernel have a maintainer for that branch. Then we > would automatically generate a list of all the packages that have > UAEL branches and advertise UAEL to be that set of packages, and > nothing more. > > The text for UAEL could be like > Does this looks like a plan acceptable by the Fedora lead? > > Opinions, comments? My first impression is... "ok so there's now a formal process, and the result is that there is no branch ever that uses this". The chances of finding sufficient capable volunteers for even the base package set is... near zero. I stress "capable" here, and with this I mean people who both have the time and the skill to track, evaluate and backport security fixes. That is a non-trivial amount of time and skill *for each package*. Most people with these skills don't themselves use these older distros -> they lose interest fast. Or in other words; I'm sure there is demand for this sort of thing, I just don't think there's sufficient volunteer supply... -- If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
