Reason for the change

[Bill Nottingham]

seth vidal (skvidal at phy.duke.edu) said: 
> > Note that "use Red Hat Linux as a base for RHEL" means that
> > Red Hat Linux will need to remain absolutely stable, so people
> > don't have to be worried about losing value in Red Hat Linux...
> 
> If Red Hat Linux is absolutely stable doesn't that cut into revenues for
> RHEL?

It's not stable as in unmoving, it's stable as in not-horribly-buggy.

> Also if people in the RHLP community wanted to extend errata lifespan on
> their own for RHL - would red hat issue community-driven errata notices?
> 
> So if I wanted to, after a year from TNV's release, continue to backport
> patches for various things and QA them myself or through the community,
> like maybe through fedora's infrastructure, would you be willing to
> issue them as errata notices to the world?

Basically, if they're issued through the normal errata process for
Red Hat Linux (which we expect to change some over time as there's
more community involvement), they will go out as normal errata.

> Would community members be given access to vendorsec notices if they
> were to be maintaining some package?

This is one of the stickier points that we have to work out for
external-to-RH maintainership and errata; how to handle embargoed
security notices.

Bill