Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
- RHEL/CentOS -> seven years of support, only important updates, new stuff if you want round about all 18 months - Fedora, stable updates channel -> only important updates, get new stuff once a year (if you skip a release) or all six months (if you want) - Fedora, bold updates channel -> get most new stuff all the time, test stuff out before it hits the stable updates channel while getting the really new stuff all six months - Fedora, development -> get new stuff constantly
I want to be pretty careful here to say that I think that's a good idea, but I'm not sure if it's going to work well. Legacy was trying to do parts of this, right? The problem was that it didn't get a lot of attention. Debian stable is supposed to do this as well but I don't know anyone that actually runs debian stable.
Stable updates are something that most programmers/community find, well, boring. And it's hard to build a community around that.
Once again, I'm not saying that it's a bad idea, it's just hard. So I'll redirect the question a bit and ask: what's the incentive to get people to care about a stable updates channel vs. what we do today?
--Chris _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
