Feature proposal: Extended Life Cycle Support
dchen at redhat.com
Tue Jul 7 13:07:26 UTC 2009
於 日，2009-07-05 於 12:32 +0200，Jeroen van Meeuwen 提到：
> On 07/05/2009 12:12 PM, Jos Vos wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 12:03:05PM +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
> >> The CentOS project, or it's upstream, has a release cycle of approximately
> >> three years -not a steady release cycle of three years but that's what it
> >> turns out to be. This disqualifies the distribution(s) as desktop Linux
> >> distributions, as desktops tend to need to run the latest and greatest for
> >> as far the latest and greatest lets them.
> > I don't completely agree that "desktops tend to need to run the latest and
> > greatest" (when we're talking about business desktops), but desktops
> > (especially also when talking about laptops because of HW compatibilities)
> > need newer software than RHEL offers, based on now 3 year old base versions
> > of most packages (except Firefox and a few others).
> Agreed, I exaggerated a little there ;-) What I meant is they tend to
> need to run the latest and greatest *compared* to servers, and as you
> said, especially laptops and newer hardware.
> -- Jeroen
Usually, people stick with older releases because they like to keep some
packages/applications which are known to works on those releases.
On the other hand, they may still want to upgrade other packages to
obtain security fixes or crucial features.
But the problem is, there is no unanimous way to determine what packages
to keep and what packages to update, so generic Fedora legacy repository
might not provide much help for those people, who actually need the
Therefore, I would like to propose an alternative approach,
namely, project Denture. See my blog post for further information:
Red Hat, Inc.
Looking to carve out IT costs?
More information about the devel