On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:11:30 -0400, Josh Boyer jwboyer@gmail.com wrote:
No, the sky does not fall. There are a few hurdles though.
- Master mirror space. This used to be an issue, in that we had to move
older releases to alt.fp.o in order to make space for the new release. I believe we still do that, so either the yum.repo.d config files for the
EOL
release would need to be changed, or we'd have to grow a lot more mirror space.
- Update push times. It takes 3+ hours to mash f9-updates right now.
Keeping that time duration in the official updates pushing for an EOL release
would
be really annoying. Particularly since we are already going to hit some major time hurdles as F10 and F11 age and definitely when we add F12.
These are very valid constraints/concerns which I've added to the Feature wiki page. This is stuff I like to hear ;-)
It doesn't work that way in practice. If it is allowed, it is official. You have to coordinate downtimes, End-of-Life-After-Death times, etc. The minute it's disabled early for one reason or another (space, time constraints, etc) people will cry foul even if it was "unofficial".
This (downtimes, etc) is why initially, I wanted the period of time between EOS and EOL to match a release cycle. I guess these dependencies make it a little more required to stick with periods of time equal to the release-cycle of a Fedora release.
If it turns out that there _is_ enough interest and the interested people are _actually_ keeping on top of security fixes etc., then maybe we could consider officially admitting that it happens, and _then_ publishing it as a 'feature'. And/or extending it to more than one extra release. But those are all questions for the future.
I would encourage people to run this as a secondary architecture. CVS still remains open for commits. You could just have a secondary koji hub for
the
builds.
It that's the solution to problems (to be) set forth, then so be it. I would love to have it as part of the primary infrastructure but then again it's no blocker.
If it doesn't take too much infrastructure work, I see no reason why we shouldn't let them _try_. It doesn't hurt Fedora at all, does it?
There is minimal pain, yes. Mostly to infrastructure and rel-eng. What
I
don't immediately see is the benefit to Fedora overall.
Is it you question the benefit given in the paragraph on the Feature page, or ...?
Thanks,
Kind regards,
Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip