Robert-André Mauchin wrote:
> How long would that wait be?
>
RHEL7.7 is only 4 days old. Everyone running CentOS should be planning
their patching cycles around the lull between a brand new RHEL Update and
the CentOS build/catch-up.
- bjs
___
Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> This was the purpose of the various branching proposals. The main issue
> there are
>
not enough time/manpower resources to make any of the proposals work as it
> needs
>
build system changes, a full time release manager and packagers who want to
> deal with it.
>
Q:
Do you understand the purpose of RHSCL PR EPEL? ;)
You want RHEL, but neither RHSCL nor EPEL is it, nor designed to be it.
That's why I said ...
EPEL's ideal aimpoint, when feasible, should be like RHSCL. ;)
-- bjs
DISCLAIMER: Sent from phone, please excuse any typos
--
Bryan J Smith
. like [RH]SCL.
Again, I wasn't trying to say "be like [RH]SCL," but more like,
"Here's a Red Hat add-on that kinda already has this 'lifecycle' that
Red Hat customers would understand."
-- bjs
--
Bryan J Smith - http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith
___
at least 3 years support?
Just a suggestion ... one that RHSCL users are familiar with. I think
it's unreasonable to expect updates beyond that, or at least not
without a rebase after 3 years.
As always, just my $0.02 ... from a Red Hat customer standpoint, not a
c
