Re: Updates Politics Proposal

["G. Roderick Singleton" <gerry pathtech org>]

On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 17:00 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 19:47 -0400, G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> > That would be nice except for one thing, these distributions check the
> > bios for newness and when it is not sufficiently new installation of
> > these becomes a big problem.
> 
> Care to elaborate on this?  I haven't seen any anaconda code that looks
> for bios dates or anything like that.  I've put CentOS4 on some pretty
> old hardware, and when you're just running servers you can run a pretty
> light CentOS4 (RHEL4).

Centos would not install. Rh9 even threw an error during install
although it does have a module that compensates.


> 
> >  On the other hand, RH7.3 is stable but does
> > need to support more modern apps. I would encourage the powers that be
> > at Fedora Legacy to consider keeping this one release as current as
> > possible as it is one of the few that can work on old hardware which
> > is
> > likely found in basements and the third world.
> 
> This is WAY beyond the scope of Fedora Legacy.  What you also fail to
> realize is that by keeping applications current, you basically get to
> the point that CentOS4 or FC3/4 is, and need the same system
> requirements to run it.  RHL7.3 runs on old hardware because it is old
> software.  If we make it new software, guess what happens....
> 

I was not complaining. What I am doing is asking if the the project
could expand a little for at least the 7.3 release. Like adding a
community contribution repository so those of us who want to take the
time to prepare packages that are outside the main scope so 7.3 can have
a much longer lifetime. For example, host the isos for 7.3 and make a
contrib directory as well. For those who can run RH9 and FC the current
situation is ideal. 

Is this a possibility?
 
-- 
G. Roderick Singleton <gerry pathtech org>
PATH tech