Jesse Keating <jkeating <at> redhat.com> writes:
> It would be, if all security updates were pushed, or at least all
> critical updates. However the current proposals are "whatever any
> maintainer feels like" not even close to "all". Leading people into
> that realm via lazyness is in fact very irresponsible, and not something
> Fedora would put it's name on.
The assumption in the proposal is that if the update is really critical,
somebody will care.
And those "lazy" people (in quotes because there are also other reasons than
laziness) would otherwise end up with no updates at all, how is that better
than at least providing _some_ security fixes, even if not all gets fixed?
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
