changes are needed, we need keep moving

[G. Roderick Singleton]

On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 16:04 -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 15:55 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 03:31:11PM -0400, Jim Popovitch wrote:
> > > http://www.netcore.fi/pekkas/buglist-rhl73.html, I see 95% of cruft that
> > > makes it difficult to focus on the 4 or 5% that I care about.  Do we
> > > really need to be releasing a mozilla for rh73?  
> > 
> > Yes, if we consider rh73 supported at all. There's important remote security
> > flaws in the older version.
> 
> I have rh73 installs that don't have mozilla installed.  What's the
> impact on me?  
> 
> My question is this:  Do we waste time and distract from important
> packages by crowding the field with application level patches for
> allications that few (if anyone) is using.  Seriously, who is using RH73
> in desktop environments?  Do we have any stats on this?
> 

>From the conversation on list that I had, I suspect not but in the same
thread I suggested that FL help to establish a contributor repository so
that those who do build apps such as mozilla for the older releases can
offer them. I do not recall whether or not this was possible but it
would sure ease things.

Is it a possibility?

-- 
G. Roderick Singleton <gerry at pathtech.org>
PATH tech