Fedora release lifecyle

[Rahul Sundaram]

Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Rahul Sundaram (sundaram at fedoraproject.org) said: 
>> If we are not planning on having Fedora as a stable server, we should 
>> not release a server variant. If we are going to do desktop and server 
>> variants, we should put some incrementally more effort into actually 
>> have something useful in each of these variants rather than just a 
>> different bunch of packages and stop going back and forth on what we are 
>> trying to do.
> 
> So, the only differentiation that's possible for a Server is the lifecycle?
> I don't buy that.

There are various other ways to differentiate a server variant but 
extending the life cycle is in many cases much needed. It expands the 
scope of the variant being more useful than just a precursor of RHEL. I 
think we should atleast seriously consider serving that need. Giving 
that we already do backports, the merge of core and extras and the 
critical security fixes only policy for the last six months I suggested 
it does appear doable.

Rahul