On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 13:37 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: >> Well, I see it as a well defined *targeted product* which happens to >> be composed of packages. It's the base from which other things can be >> installed from the Internet. What is the problem with "static pile of >> packages"? (I have to admit to only skimming this thread) > > Updates to the previous release will quickly become N-V-R "newer" than > the static pile of packages, which renders your upgrade a bit... odd. In the desktop context packages get upgraded when PackageKit notices new stuff and the user starts downloading it. What was originally on the CD is mostly irrelevant. >> > Of course, the Live image >> > doesn't necessarily have the upgrade problem we're talking about, >> > because you can't use the live image to do an upgrade. Makes it less >> > than useful for people. >> >> For upgrades we should be pushing people towards preupgrade. If >> preupgrade works well, I'm having trouble thinking of scenarios in >> which you'd end up with a physical image and want to do an upgrade. >> Maybe if you're out of disk space you'd need physical media to >> download the updates on to, but there's also no reason preupgrade >> couldn't prompt you to insert a USB stick or blank CD. > > preupgrade requires a significant network cost. Sure, but how did you get that CD in the first place? I'm having trouble thinking of scenarios where somehow you acquire a CD that you didn't download yourself, but you already have Fedora installed, and you don't have access to enough network bandwidth to upgrade. Anyways the angle I'm coming at here is that Fedora should be producing only a few live images and things like Richard Jones' minimal image, not the choose-your-own-adventure DVD. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
