reviving Fedora Legacy

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at freenet.de
Wed Oct 15 12:19:09 UTC 2008


On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 07:33 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 09:42:28AM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 08:36:05AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> >> 
> >> If we present the _appearance_ of a distro with security updates, while
> >> in fact there are serious security issues being unfixed, then that is
> >> _much_ worse than the current "That distro is EOL. Upgrade before you
> >> get hacked" messaging.
> >
> >The aim here is not to present the _appearance_ of a distro with
> >security updates but give the choice to the user either to upgrade or to
> >stick with a distro where some packages will not be maintained.
> >Something along "That distro is EOL. Upgrade before you get hacked.
> >Alternatively, and at your own risk, you can enable a repository where 
> >some packages are updated on a volunteer basis, but some packages aren't
> >maintained anymore."
> >
> >With a page listing which packages are still supported.
> 
> The issue you will have is that people will not be comfortable opening the
> ACLs for things like the kernel or glibc or gcc.
And their rationale being what?

Them preferring leaving users exposed to vulnerabilities?

Or is their rationale of personal nature?





More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list