On 8 June 2014 17:01, John R. Dennison <jrd at gerdesas.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 08, 2014 at 05:20:47PM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote: > > > > I've read through the the responses so for and the main concern seems to > > be understanding the linkage between upstream and CentOS. Am I correct > > in that? > > That and the fact that it has been stated repeatedly that the CentOS > core product will _not_ change and what is being discussed here is a > change to that same core product. > Well I think this is more about defining what people think of as change and no change. Being the internet I am sure there are some set of people who will define any new release as being a change in the core product and thus a breakage. And there will be people who are at the other end of the spectrum and ok with all the change in the world as long as the name is CentOS and the first number is similar to the RHEL name. And then there are a ton of definitions of what is change and what isn't in between. So a better discussion is I think people defining what they would accept as being 'change' and what is not change. The board has stated their view of change and various users are defining in a piecemeal way what is their definition of change. I think that it might be better if the users state a bit clearer so that the board has a definite idea of where the lines are. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20140608/a480a40c/attachment-0007.html>