On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Colin Walters <walters@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Michael Schwendt wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:32:12 -0600, Arthur wrote: >>> >>>> 6 months is a pretty long time to wait for a major release. I >>>> understand the rationale, but if this is going to be the new Fedora, >>>> best announce this and let everyone know so that they can reevaluate >>>> if Fedora is for them. As things are, I feel that we are being _too_ >>>> conservative. Any further move to more conservatism seriously affects >>>> Fedora's usefulness to me. >>> >>> Why? >> >> Because, like me, he chose Fedora *because* of the stream of updates, we >> *want* those updates, including version upgrades. We would be using Ubuntu >> or CentOS or any of the other bazillion conservative distros otherwise. >> >> A distro with a 6-month release cycle, but conservative updates, already >> exists, it's called Ubuntu, why do we need to copy it? If you want Ubuntu, >> go use Ubuntu. > > I don't think that's a good argument - there are quite a lot of > nontrivial differences between the two aside from the updates, such as > commitment to Free Software, Ubuntu is the one with an FSF blessed spin, so I don't think Fedora has any monopoly on that. > multilib, different strengths in package set Not significant enough to choose Fedora over Ubuntu or vice versa. In fact, I'd guess that Ubuntu has more packages and packagers than Fedora (just guessing however) So really, it comes down to making Fedora more Ubuntu like without the Ubuntu groupies. -- Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin ( www.pembo13.com ) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
