Doug Ledford wrote:
> That or we would have to go with another alternative entirely. People
> have (well, to be fair mainly James, but he's right I think) pointed
> Kevin at rawhide time and time again. And Kevin has pointed out (also
> rightly) that rawhide isn't really consumable. So, we fix that. We
> make rawhide consumable, you make rawhide the thing that people track if
> they want continuous rolling updates, and you make the actual releases
> more stable.
The problem is that this doesn't fix the fundamental problem that there's no
set point at which to expect changes requiring manual user intervention or
otherwise not suitable within a release. And adding such points would make
it impossible to actually use Rawhide for its purpose: doing active
development. (You'd have to wait 6 months if you miss the breakage window,
which would have to be extremely short, like 1-2 days at most, not to
disrupt users' workflow. It's impossible to do development under such
constraints.) So IMHO it's impossible to make Rawhide truly consumable.
"Semi-rolling" releases (i.e. what we currently have) have unique beneficial
characteristics which neither fully rolling releases like Rawhide nor
conservative releases have. Basically, you ideally get both the new releases
you'd get in a rolling release and the stability of a numbered release, and
I'd argue we're very close to that ideal, even if tradeoffs have to be made
occasionally.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
