On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 04:43:38PM +0200, Emmanuel Seyman wrote: > * Patrice Dumas [12/10/2008 16:29] : > > > > It doesn't go beyond the requirements for a fedora LTS. If fedora LTS > > isn't on par with fedora from the infrastrructure point of view, it is > > not worth pursuing. > > At which point we're back to making excuses for not actually doing > anything and demanding that people who aren't interested in Fedora LTS > do the needed work. Which work? Not shutting down builders and other infras for the EOL branches? In my proposal I propose to find somebody to do the signing, which is the only part that requires work -- unless I am missing something. I am not competent in infrastructure building nor have I the time to lead a project which includes building an infrastructure. But I can lead a project targeted at packaging the core of fedora for LTS -- but only the packaging part. > This is insane and if everybody had that atitude, half the Fedora SIGs > would never have seen the light of day. Most of the SIGs don't need specific infrastructure. The analogy is EPEL, but EPEL got support. -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
