On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 09:14:42PM +0000, Paul W. Frields wrote:
The expectations people will undoubtedly have from this sort of extended release maintenance will be completely out of line with what's provided. How can you provide security updates for some of a distribution and have it be meaningful? What does it matter if you patch a problem in a user application and not those in the kernel? And how do you reconcile that disparity with the expectations of the user of this supposedly maintained branch, who thinks that somehow they're doing better security-wise than if they move to a platform actively maintained by a community, be it a current Fedora, RHEL, or CentOS?
I cannot do anything if people don't read the pages explaining what the project offers. Did I said something about 'doing better security-wise than if they move to a platform actively maintained by a community, be it a current Fedora, RHEL, or CentOS'. No.
-- Pat