On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 10:53:24PM +0200, Till Maas wrote: > > For how many Fedora Releases do you want to keep then infrastructure running > after EOL? E.g. in bodhi the oldest supported release is at the top of the I think it is a bit too soon to answer, but maybe something like 3 years max, or 5 years max. And maybe try to be long enough such that it allows to upgrade to the next RHEL+EPEL (that is all the evr in the RHEL/Centos are higher than those at the time fedora was EOLed, and we hope or try to have packagers not render this upgrade path impossible). > menu, having the releases there, that probably the majority of maintainers > does not care about at the top is not so nice. Maybe the UI can be adapted to > allow to specify which releases on is interested. Indeed, having 6 additional release will clutter bohdi a lot (whether they are at the top or not, in fact...). This is not only an issue for this proposal, but also for EPEL, for the day it switches to bodhi, and something that requires some thinking. The most simple would be to use another bodhi instance, but I can only guess that bodhi requires some work to be set up, which contradicts using few fedora resources. I will ask on the infras list. > Will there be a script that orphans all packages of the EOL release for every > non interested maintainer in packagedb, so that the interested maintainers > can pick it up and the non interested maintainers do not get unecessary mail? This is in the 'Possible follow-up' section, but maybe this should be done right from the start. -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
