On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:21:41 +0100 Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The problem with all the proposals centered on the idea of N-1 as > conservative, N as less conservative, including yours above and > jreznik's, is that it forces all the people who expect a constant > type of updates to upgrade twice as often, i.e. twice a year. > Especially for the conservative folks, this will be a big annoyance. > With low bandwidths, you have to get a CD/DVD shipped each time! In > addition, I think the inconsistency will confuse our users a lot. I think you have to decide if you are siding for people with low bandwidth or cutting them out. You just said we cannot cater to people with low bandwidth. Well stick with your point and don't swindle as soon as it doesn't help you win an argument for argument sake ... Users are confused and annoyed by too frequent upgrades. Those people are fine sticking with N and then N-1 until security updates are no more, and only jumping from N-1 to N+1 once a year. This includes many developers I can assure you. Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
