On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Benny Amorsen <benny+usenet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "Mat Booth" <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Sorry for replying to myself, but another thought occurred after I hit >> send: Maybe I don't understand *why* you need bleeding edge if what >> you want is stability... > > I want bleeding edge when we first develop new systems, so I get all > the new shiny features for the beta testers to play with... Then when > the bugs have been found, everything should stay stable without > needing significant care for a few years, until the system is replaced > with a new even shinier one and the cycle continues. > > Red Hat Enterprise Linux provides stability. Fedora provides bleeding > edge. Lots of people, including me, want both. > > That doesn't mean we get to have both. No, that doesn't mean we *can't* have both. The infrastructure needed is close. The quality of people is about right, but the quantity is a few short. With some *cooperation* from all sides, and maybe a kick in the ..., er, some gentle nudging from leaders, we can implement both. We _need_ to implement both. jerry -- Store in cool, dry place. Rotate stock. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
