> From: "duncan brown" <duncanbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Jeremy Brown said: > > >> > > This has been discussed before, and the unofficial response is that > > FC1 will probably get security releases for 2-3 weeks past > the release > > of FC2, just long enough to give users a chance to upgrade. > I suspect > > fedora.us will provide unofficial security updates for > users that have > > to stick with FC1 for longer. > > i think that should be months, not weeks. > > if i were a millionaire, i'd find a way to keep a fc release > alive for a year for the world, that way you're only having > to upgrade every other ver, not shoved into another ver asap. > An interesting point you make about 'having' to upgrade. If a later version of a package or packages doesn't offer something significant improvement in features or security then there seems to be little point in it. I note with interest that http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/ has been showing a 2/ directory for a while now (and which gives a 403), and that no mirror I've seen even goes that far, and that it's now the 15th of May. Of course, with the tangle of package interdependencies, and since security holes are at least in part caused by inappropriate or incorrectly written scripts (the value added part of a distribution) I'd prefer to wait; half this system is compiled from source, and it works fine. I'd also prefer a solid timetable with milestones checked as accomplished and delays, expected or actual, publicised, rather than hand waving at http://fedora.redhat.com/participate/schedule/ and saying it's all there. But that's been discussed before.
