Adam Williamson wrote:
> If we are - or _want to be_ - that kind of a distribution, we have to
> provide a stable update set so we can stop telling people who just want
> a distro to run Aunt Flo's desktop or their webserver or whatever on to
> run CentOS or Ubuntu instead. If, however, we really don't care about
> that kind of usage scenario and instead we want to focus only on being a
> kind of project for the prototyping of systems that will eventually
> _become_ components of that kind of generally usable operating system -
> which to my mind is more or less the status at the moment - it doesn't
> make any sense to provide a stable update set, it's not serving any real
> purpose, and it'd just be a waste of effort.
Actually, I think our KDE updates are very much beneficial even to "Aunt
Flo" type users. We wouldn't push them out if we thought otherwise.
In the current state of KDE, users are thanking us at each 4.n release for
the usability improvements. And while that effect diminishes as KDE gets to
a more mature state, the changes between releases also get less invasive and
thus the risk also goes down (e.g. KDE 3.5 wasn't quite as major as KDE 4.1
was, we're even seeing this progression with 4.x now).
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
