[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: radical suggestion for fc4 release



On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 20:41:56 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot
<Nicolas Mailhot laposte net> wrote:
> As a matter of fact, since a RHEL lifetime is 5 years truncating
> anything older than that would probably be ok. But there *will* be
> people who install a first-gen RHEL2.1 (because that's the version their
> OS dpt validated) near RHEL2.1 end-of-life who'll then update it
> partially or completely to the latest updates. So in some cases, 5y is a
> reasonable minimum.

RHEL users and the timescales invovled there might be a valid concern,
if the fedora package histories are deeply mingled with the RHEL
package histories.  If Red Hat packagers end up stripping items from
fedora packages and them just needing to put the items back for rhel
packages, that seems a bit wasteful concerning the small amount of
data that has been quantified so far in this list.  Depends on what
Red Hat does internally as to whether chopping the changelogs in
fedora will affect rhel users later on.

-jef


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]