On 22/07/10 23:15, R P Herrold wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Charlie Brady wrote: > >> On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Charlie Brady wrote: >>> timeliness *appears* not to be important to the CentOS >>> project, hence this discussion. >> >> Not intended to be a smear - please see timeline @ >> >> http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=4386 > > And this the week after OLS. Et tu? Ah well. > > Sure it is a data point and I suppose 'we' of CentOS are > supposed to promise to never disappoint whomever again. > > Tough. Not me, thank you. This is a labor of love, and if > you want commercial SLA's you'll have to buy them from me. > Prices on request of a serious offer to purchase > http://www.owlriver.com/wings/ > > I'm confused as to exactly what you are saying here. The CentOS Project FAQ states: Q. How long after redhat publishes a fix does it take for CentOS to publish a fix? A. Our goal is to have individual RPM packages available on the mirrors within 72 hours of their release, and normally they are available within 24 hours. https://www.centos.org/modules/smartfaq/faq.php?faqid=7 Are you implying that you will provide security updates under a paid SLA agreement but not to the wider CentOS Community? <snip> > > * shrug * > > -- Russ herrold > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel >