Kevin Kofler wrote:
shmuel siegel <fedora <at> shmuelhome.mine.nu> writes:
Patrice Dumas wrote:
More QA in EOL than in release doesn't make sense. This 'anarchical'
approach is not very anarchical given what kind of changes are allowed.
From a developer's point of view you are right. But I believe that the
majority of risk takers would upgrade before the end of life simply
because they want the newer stuff.
We're just being pragmatic. It doesn't make sense to demand more QA than we
have the resources to provide, that is what ultimately made Fedora Legacy fail.
Kevin Kofler
I disagree. You are not being pragmatic. You are looking for
infrastructure support from Fedora without indicating that there is a
benefit to Fedora. Supply without demand is no more useful than demand
without supply. Since Fedora views itself as "the cutting edge distro",
you have an uphill PR fight. Give the Fedora project a reason to spend
some of their limited resources on you. At least let them know your
target audience and why they would be interested.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
