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

Re: Again: EOL Policy for Fedora Extras

Once upon a time Saturday 18 February 2006 12:30 pm, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Hi all!
> We still have no defined EOL Policy for Fedora Extras -- there were some
> ideas and concepts floating around, but no real policy came out of it so
> far. I'd really like to get this solved somehow soon. That's why I'm
> writing this mail.

I think  that extras should follow Core,  well i really think there should be 
no core and extras  there should be Fedora,  which is fully supported by the 
community.  Kind of like  what Warren Suggested as his dream.

> - keep FE3 fully alive for RHEL4/CentOS and/or Aurora; some people that
> suggested this even want to take over the complete maintainer-ship for
> all packages in FE3
> (
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-February/msg00652.h
>tml )
> Well, I can understand this idea. But there are some things that I don't
> like:
> -- Maintaining FE3 is a job that needs more then one packager. Two or
> three is a minimum IMHO and AFAICS.
I know i cant do it by myself.  But i am willing to stand up and say hey I 
want this to work.  What i would suggest is that once core move to legacy 
extras follows suit.  What will this mean.  no big updates  Just security 
fixes and major bug fixes,  though there shouldnt be many of the latter.  I 
maintain 3 FC3 servers  and have no plans to update the os any time soon. 

how would i see it working?  by using the existing infrastructure.  package 
maintainers who want to still maintain  there packages  should be allowed to.  
What  is hardest  is know  who is and who is not going to maintain there 
packages.  we have a couple of ways that we can know  this.  but it all boils 
down to we need a database  that has the information in it.  how do we get 

1) when submitting packages  the maintainer states i will support development 
and current  or i will support only current  or development and 2 releases  
or   I will support indefinetly.  

2) When a package  maintainer decides  he no longer wishes to maintain a 
package for a release  he/she fills out a form  updating the info  so that 
someone wanting to jump in can.

One thing i realise  now  is that some people may not want to   or have the 
resources  to support the development branch.  Its a huge moving target.  not 
only do you get frequent changes in extras   you get it in core also.  and 
some people just cant  or dont want to keep up.  we kinda assume  that they 

So  im going to step up and say i want in,  but it will take more than me.  
The more people that continue  to maintain there packages the better.  If 
people are not going to maintain them  then step up and say so.  Lets make 
this work for all.  I see that a clear time  to say ok  thats all she wrote 
in this book in when Legacy stops  supporting core.  based on stated legacy 
policy of 1-2-3 out fc3  would live until legacy takes over from fc7  if i 
read it correctly.  the one thing  that bothers me about legacy  is that it 
supports only x86   no x86_64  and no ppc   I personally  use all those 
arches in addition to sparc.

So will anybody else help?

Dennis Gilmore,  RHCE  
<dennis AT ausil DOT us> http://www.ausil.us
Proud Australian

Attachment: pgpVJPS6jtacG.pgp
Description: PGP signature

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