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