with thanks to Ali Lomonaco and Michal Jaegermann for proposing packages!
Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification
FEDORALEGACY-2006-211760
Bugzilla https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211760
2006-11-06
---
On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 10:04:06PM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> Additionally, the project simply needs at least one person who manages the
> project as a full-time job.
And by "needs", I mean: I'm very skeptical that it can be viable without
this. While the project was in its most functional sta
On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 08:21:26AM -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Wave our magic Fedora wand to produce more (active) community contributors?
> OK, lemme see, now where did I leave that darn thing...
Well, to be honest, a little bit, yeah. There just hasn't been good
infrastructure in place for contr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dave Stevens wrote:
> a confession of inadequacy is more of a preliminary than an answer
>
> Dave
Sorry, to butt in
Maybe, what we need to do is have a re-organization of the idea of
FedoraLegacy instead of trying to overtax anyone. Or chase an
On Monday 06 November 2006 09:59, Dave Stevens wrote:
> a confession of inadequacy is more of a preliminary than an answer
Confession how? How would it be any different from the Fedora Legacy project
itself from making some sort of 'confession' ? The unfortunate problem is
ours to solve.
--
On Monday 06 November 2006 06:21, Rex Dieter wrote:
> David Eisenstein wrote:
> > Fedora Board, please take heed. Although providing a stable, long-term
> > operating system/environment is *not* one of Fedora Project's stated
> > goals, the practical lifetime of a Fedora release of 1 year (without
David Eisenstein wrote:
> Fedora Board, please take heed. Although providing a stable, long-term
> operating system/environment is *not* one of Fedora Project's stated
> goals, the practical lifetime of a Fedora release of 1 year (without
> Legacy to be there to security-maintain them for (at le
- Original Message -
From: "Thorsten Leemhuis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: [fab] looking at our surrent state a bit
> >> == MISC ==
> >>
> >> * I got the impression (and LWN readers, too ["hello corbert! "]) that
> >>
