long term support release

[Les Mikesell]

Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> 2008/1/25 Jesse Keating <jkeating at redhat.com>:
>> This is not actually true.  In fact, there is a lot of what RHEL does
>> where it takes queues from what Fedora does.  Perhaps this isn't very
>> well communicated, but to state that as Fedora leadership you have no
>> input/control into what RHEL does is pretty false.
> 
> I have no...control.  I've got input, yes.. but not control.  Big
> difference.  Of course there is a measure of alignment, since there is
> engineering resources that Red Hat makes available that crosses the
> fenceline. And I know that people who straddle that fence line are
> making a damn important effort to make the alignment better over time,
> to the benefit of everyone.
> 
> But at the same time, everyone out here firmly planted in Fedora land
> who stands on tippy-toe to see over into the RHEL side of things,
> needs to understand that to effectively drive changes in how Fedora
> and RHEL interface requires some mutual benefit arguments.
> Something I'm not currently seeing a lot of in how externals are
> approaching the conversation.
> 
> Which is why I want to go to the Summit, grab a few RHEL customer
> reps, put their head in a vice, and squeeze out some ideas from their
> perspective to add to my Fedora roadmap smoothie.
> 

It's not so much a question of what goes into RHEL, but the feasibility 
of converting whatever that might be back into fedora updates after the 
fact, something that might not be possible to know until the time comes 
unless someone wants to try FC6->RHEL5 at this point. It might go more 
smoothly if it could be planned that way, though.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com