On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 11:26:22AM -0400, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:05:08 +0200 > Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > In that case skipping some of the fedora release, like doing the LTS > > stuff only each year may help. > > > before solving the "how many" problem... > lets be realistic I agree, but the issue of space may be a show stopper for some, so better think about it. > 1) Making every release LTS is not feasible, there's just not going to > be enough manpower for that (history has shown that) for now at least. Agreed. > 2) I don't think users would even really demand such a beast I don't know in general, but I know that I stopped proposing people that were not absolute power users to use fedora, even if they were fluent enough because of this issue. So fedora lost at least 2 users. But they were not users likely to contribute, so they don't weight that much. > 3) The volunteer base is a bit thin; current fedora volunteers tend to > work on the latest version (or maybe two). In fact, so do many users. There are only 2 versions... But it is true I don't think there are that many packagers interested in LTS, for the user, I am not sure. But I also think that the amount of work for the 2 first year is not high, no updates, for most packages is right. There are indeed some big and complex core packages that may be problematic, we'll see. > I would suggest focusing on first getting ONE such LTS release going. > Figure out a plan on how to get out of it first (communication wise > etc) in case interest isn't what you expect, and how to monitor the > health. With that I suspect the fedora leadership will be happy to > endorse it happily. My suggestion is first to communicate only to the packagers that they can update the packages, look whether there are some that are updated, especially those in @code and @base, and especially when there is a knowledge that something is broken or a security issue, create a SIG if it looks that there is support, discuss the details, see how many participants, make the rules and only afterwards communicate something to the exterior. > Do one. Get that working. Don't even think about multiple until you > have gotten one down. You'll learn so much that it's not worth planning > beyond that. Indeed, maybe the best would be to start with F9 such that the infrastructure doesn't have to be revived. -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
