Re: You Need Fedora Legacy!! Re: [fab] looking at our surrent state a bit
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
Axel Thimm wrote:
On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 11:46:37PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:Unifying and opening up more of the infrastructure and other ideas like that only doing critical security fixes are things to look at.But FL's charter is already to only cater about security fixes, or do you imply to categorize them and allow some to slip? E.g. allow local priviledge escalation, but fix remote exploits? I don't think that's a good FL manifesto. Allowing non-critical security issues to exist will only harm the project's front to the public more.
Not really. It is better than not pushing updates at all. See https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-security-list/2006-October/msg00006.html
Lack of human resources is also a result of higher barrier to entry. New people need to be able to contribute easily. Existing contributors in other sub projects like extras need to able to do that. Unifying infrastructure and automating more of the tasks helps in both ways.The issue is also not the infrstructure IMO, it's simply lack of human resources and either someone needs to assign them to it if that entity (Red Hat/board/whatever) considers that a worthy goal, or the resources need to come from more voluntary people, e.g. FL needs a marketing manager.
Or the need for resources is cut by reducing the number and time span of supported releases
Just as reducing time span is a option, classification of vulnerabilities and working on critical ones after a time span is also a option that needs to be considered.
Rahul -- fedora-legacy-list mailing list fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
[Fedora Development] [Fedora Announce] [Fedora Legacy Announce] [Fedora Config] [PAM] [Fedora General Discussion] [Big List of Linux Books] [Gimp] [Free Internet Dating] [Yosemite Questions]