The Ministry of Truth

Posted Nov 21, 2006 23:41 UTC (Tue) by jimmybgood (guest, #26142)
In reply to: The Ministry of Truth by khim
Parent article: Fedora board meeting minutes

It's fascinating what a little research will turn up. I'm dead wrong, at least as FC2 is concerned. You are also dead wrong and corbet was dead wrong in the article I cited. We were all just repeating rumours with our own spin.

I apologize to the fedora community.

I currently can find no indication that Fedora has any commitment to security or bug fix updates for any period. So I'll change my comment.

For me to believe that Fedora can be useful for any serious purpose other than demonstration or as a test bed for Redhat development, they need to clearly state how long they will provide support in the form of security updates.

The Ministry of Truth

Posted Nov 22, 2006 5:12 UTC (Wed) by mdomsch (guest, #5920) [Link]

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAQ#head-9baa0612d025313054...

both indicate the previous updates and security policy. It lists the example that Fedora Core 3 was updated until Fedora Core 5 test2 was released. Under the new policy (using for example the same versions, just for comparison), Fedora Core 3 would be updated until Fedora Core 5 release plus one month. This is, in effect, an extension of maintenance by test2->release+1m.

Also discussed was "should the new policy be implemented retroactively" such that FC5 is covered until FC7+1m, or should it start with FC6. I believe there was concensus that it should include FC5 as well. This gives people a chance to do the upgrade from N to N+2 and be covered for the whole duration between, without forgoing security errata for a time, and without requiring an upgrade from N to N+1 to N+2 in order to get security errata during that time.