Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
* Ralf Corsepius [12/10/2008 11:45] :
Similar proposals have come up several times before (I once proposed
something like this), but so far, they all had been shoot down so far.
Actually, nothing has ever been proposed.
Occasionnally, someone suggests that updates be released post-EOL and
we then get submerged in proposals that all vary on the set of packages
to be supported, the ABI/API compatibility that should be given, who
will actually maintain what, ...
All of the people willing to work on this project start arguing amongst
themselves as to what is the right thing to do and nothing ever gets
proposed so there's never been anything to refuse.
We then get a whole host of excuses (the most popular of which is that
this is something that can only be done with the Fedora infrastructure),
all of which get replaced with other excuses every time one is shot
down.
Emmanuel
Seems to me that you have the beginning of a plan. There needs to be an
individual with the responsibility to create a full-blown proposal. He
must identify the scope of the task and the resources that would be
required to fulfill the requirements. He must also be willing and able
to incorporate the various suggestions and objections into the overall
plan. Judging by the comments on this thread he would also need to
identify an infrastructure sponsor who would commit to giving the
project a home. As long as this remains a group of individuals with a
vague feeling that a legacy project would be a good thing to have,
nothing will happen.
And no, I am not that individual.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
