Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 9 Feb 2008 11:04:22 +0100 > Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx> wrote: [...] > > 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. In calculus they called this number \epsilon ;-) > 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... There just seems not to be enough /real/ demand to keep it running for a reasonable amount of time. The demand is more a "it sure sounds nice to be able to run the same Fedora for 5 years, in case the versions in between turn out duds", but very few really contemplate suffering such outdated stuff; and in my experience people who run old versions are also the same who don't ever apply any updates. -- 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
