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

Re: Follow-up on Extended Life Cycle



On Tue, 21 Jul 2009, Tim Burke wrote:

Jesse Keating wrote:
On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 21:18 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:

It has
been something like 4 years since the Fedora Legacy project ended, and
if you have a sizable labor pool you can eliminate one of the main
reasons that happened.

Note, to maintain Critical Security updates, which is essentially what
RHEL does once a RHEL release reaches it's maintenance mode, RH Security
team estimates that a single full time person can handle the work load.
This is a sizable pool when compared to what Fedora Legacy worked with,
and Legacy's target was much more broad, and the infrastructure much
less helpful.


I'm guessing that this 1 fulltime person in a security response team role is to track, monitor, and coordinate the issues that need to be addressed. Which in many cases is different from the devel, releng and test aspects - necessitating much more than 1 fulltime person's worth of work to pull off the broader initiative. Right?

In the world of RHEL, this would certainly be true -- but in the world of Fedora?

What QA/releng work is required to push updates into Fedora currently, after the initial distro has been pushed out? I'm pretty sure it's not much; we just use bodhi to coordinate +1s to packages in the updates testing repo, and that's about the extent of it. This process would not change.

--g

--
Computer Science professors should be teaching open source.
Help make it happen.   Visit http://teachingopensource.org.


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