On 12/16/20 10:47 AM, James Pearson wrote: > Johnny Hughes: >>> >>> As others have said, it misses the _really_ important bit about the traditional CentOS model which is to follow the RHEL ~10 year life cycle >>> It doesn't matter how good/rock solid/whatever CentOS Stream turns out to be, but if it only has a 5 year life cycle for each major release, >>> then it no good to me (and I suspect many others) >> >> There is a 2 year overlap with the next version of stream as well .. in >> this case CentOS Stream 9. How long is Debian or Ubuntu LTS maintained >> for free? > > I don't use Debian or Ubuntu LTS, so have no idea > >> 5 years may not be long enough for you .. but it certainly pretty long. >> And I am TRYING to get that extended. I may not be successful, we'll >> have to see. > > Why not just have CentOS Stream revert to using whatever RPMS are released for the matching RHEL major release when it is in the maintenance part of its lifecycle? > Even out side the maintenance phase .. there will be some bugs that will get incorporated into the next point release. Those should be in Stream first. There will never be another 'downstream rhel source code build' done by Red Hat. This is just not in the cards.