<html><head></head><body>+1 for maintaining the current versioning scheme, I have not heard any reason to cinvince me itherwise, only straw man arguments such as these.<br>
<br>
This could be a very expensive change, were it to happen. That is, expensive as in loss of market share and creation of confusion.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On June 10, 2014 12:33:29 AM CEST, Johnny Hughes <johnny@centos.org> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre class="k9mail">On 06/09/2014 04:05 PM, Peter wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;"> On 06/10/2014 05:21 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;"> Indeed. In some areas, we already are. That's what we want to turn<br /> around. This is the fundamental reason why we can't simply rest and keep<br /> doing what we've been doing. Even if we're flawless in the core mission,<br /> we'd still be ignoring emerging areas where we must grow to survive.<br /></blockquote> I don't think I've seen anyone argue against SIGs here. I think most<br /> people on this list understand the importance of SIGs to CentOS and the<br /> future that CentOS will have with them. What I see is many people here<br /> saying that SIGs should not dictate the direction of the core OS, that<br /> needs to remain pure to upstream.<br /></blockquote><br />No one is saying that anything in the Core OS is changing ... the Core<br />OS will be the Core OS. It will be ONLY packages in the RHEL tree and<br />it will not contain anything extra. That is not the issue here. The<br />issue is, people think they can run CentOS-6.4 after 6.5 is released and<br />it is the same as running RHEL-6.4 AUS/EUS ... and its not. Our<br />numbering is not like their numbering and that is causing massive<br />confusion that we need to fix. One can absolutely, positively not stay<br />behind and have security. It is very dangerous.<br /><br />Add to that the fact that the SIGs also may need to have a new installer<br />be created between RHEL releases, so we may (or may not ... only time<br />will tell) need to create some new install trees.<br /><br />None of that adds packages into the os/ or updates/ directory that is<br />not in RHEL ... that will be the same and people will have to opt-in to<br />get anything that is not Core .. just like they do now.<br /><br /><snip><br /><br /><br /><br /></pre><p style="margin-top: 2.5em; margin-bottom: 1em; border-bottom: 1px solid #000"></p><pre class="k9mail"><hr /><br />CentOS-devel mailing list<br />CentOS-devel@centos.org<br /><a href="http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel">http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel</a><br /></pre></blockquote></div></body></html>