On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 21:07 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote: > > On Tue, 2 Mar 2010, Jesse Keating wrote: > > Ok... removing deprecated uses is a questionable at best update, but > > here is the kicker. The perl in F11 is perl-5.10.0-82.fc11. So these > > functions aren't actually deprecated in F11. So... why is this update > > going out? What possible benefit does the user get from this? Does > > anybody see this as a reasonable update to publish on F11? My own personal opinion is that stable updates should only fix serious issues, or security problems. Fedora has such a short lifetime as it is, I really can't see the value in pushing features to F11 when it will die soon. I think it's far better to leave the churn in rawhide. > the suggestion I had made at fudcon went something like this: > > 1. all packages being put in as updates would need to be marked as per > the type of update. the default is 'trivial'. Options might include: new > pkg, trivial, feature, bugfix, security > > 2. We would issue security updates whenever they happened. Issue bugfix > updates once every 2 weeks. Everything else once a month. Far better and more predictable. Even better would be to explicitly call out the security updates in to a separate repo feed like $other distros. The packages are the same (not a separate buildroot - I realize there are non-trivial dependency issues) in my utopia, but they're easily distinguished from non-security related features. As it is, I agree with various blog postings by people here over the last few days. I very rarely update my (non world facing) Fedora systems these days unless I know I can reboot and have time to fix things. I have rawhide systems for rawhide but I know if they break I can just fix them later because they're not needed to get other stuff done and I can always use another VM, or whatever. The point is, one expects rawhide to "break", but one does not expect stable to break. This isn't $Enterprise_Linux, it doesn't come with a guarantee and does expect to be a moving target, but that doesn't mean there can't be a predictable update cycle and a reasonable expectation that updates are necessary and won't break systems. Jon. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
