On Thursday 21 December 2006 20:36, James Wilkinson wrote: > Anne Wilson wrote: > > You miss the point, Kevin. Of course you can upgrade on older systems > > - if you want to. I've done it myself. I have two boxes, though, that > > run FC4 and for several reasons I do not want to upgrade them. It's > > just 10 months since FC4 was installed on both of them. I don't need > > the latest and greatest on either of them, but I do want security > > updates, and I'm not going to get them. Frankly, Legacy was the > > biggest reason I had for coming to Fedora. I understand about the lack > > of manpower in volunteer situations, but I'm less than happy. If I > > have to install afresh to get a secure system I'll probably change to > > CentOS rather than install FC6 on those boxes. > > For what it's worth, there is a current official proposal that security > support should be extended to about thirteen months -- support for > installing one release, missing the next completely, and then when the > release *two* after you'd originally installed came out, you'd have a > month to upgrade. > > See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraSummit/ReleaseProcess (at the > bottom in bold) and > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2006-December/msg0009 >9.html and the following thread. > I like Rahul's proposal. 13 months is just not quite good enough, because it takes a few weeks after release to get everything settled down. That could leave a server in a less than satisfactory situation for, say, a month. Doing it Rahul's way, servers could be updated annually, a few weeks after release time. Anne
Attachment:
pgpaERyAZUlAN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
