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

Re: Feature proposal: Extended Life Cycle Support



On 07/07/2009 02:30 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
Is there a reason any of that can't be done as a secondary arch-like effort?


Nope. Not as far as I can see.

I've already pointed out why it's painful to keep EOL releases around.  You
didn't really address those, and you seemed to have grouped them into
"minimal infrastructure effort".  I didn't touch on package signing earlier,
but that is another potential hurdle.

Let me put is this way:

None of the items I have listed are show-stoppers or insurmountable.  However,
unless someone comes forward with _concrete_ proposals on how to approach them
and actual _people_ willing to work on it, they won't change.  I don't think
that is an undue burden to having this approved by a governing committee,
whether it be FESCo or the Board.

It's as simple as that.  I think Jeroen understands that, and he seems to
really want constructive criticism on the proposal.  So I'll be happy to wait
and see what comes of this.


+1 to all of the above.

Kind regards,

Jeroen van Meeuwen
-kanarip


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