On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 16:22 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > To be fair - no other distro revs as quickly or as much as fedora does, > either. We tend to get new things first. That's one of Fedora's goals. Well, not always, there are counter-examples. OK, those are broadly exceptions and Fedora probably does, overall, do more newer stuff faster (e.g. it went to X server 1.5 a lot faster than MDV, for one), but I don't think it's such a huge difference that it makes it impossible to have a basically usable dev branch. Hell, X is *usable* as long as vesa works. I'm talking about 'usable', not 'perfect', here. Stuff still *breaks*, in other dev branches. The point is they have a base of users who seem perfectly able to keep using them despite the breakages, and a wide base of developers running the dev branches. > So, saying that other distros have an easier development branch is > really just evidence that fedora is doing what fedora does, move > quickly. I'm not sure that's actually the case. :) I think it's mostly a case of vicious and virtuous circles: Fedora has a dev branch that everyone believes is hard, so no-one uses it, so it tends to get broken a bit more often, so everyone believes it's hard, so... By comparison, if you have a dev branch with a somewhat lower barrier of entry, more people use it, the developers who use it tend to fix stuff quickly when it gets broken (dog food principle), the wider user base means the word gets out quickly when something's broken and you can avoid or work around the breakage, so the dev branch gets a reputation for being usable, so more people use it, so... I've been running Rawhide for a few weeks now, and haven't had any major problems. Granted, small sample size and restricted duration, but still. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
