On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 01:40 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Why would we want to? Just let things going as long as there is at least one maintainer committing something. Even if not all security issues get fixed, it's better than if none gets fixed.
I disagree with that very strongly.
If we present the _appearance_ of a distro with security updates, while in fact there are serious security issues being unfixed, then that is _much_ worse than the current "That distro is EOL. Upgrade before you get hacked" messaging.
For anything to have the Fedora name on it, it _must_ have guaranteed security fixes for at least the highest priority issues.
(That's not a decree; I'm not in a position to make such. It's just common sense.)