Bill Nottingham wrote: > You can build some faster-moving feature packages on top of a stable base > for those that want it. In theory you can. In practice that turns out to work rather poorly. It's the model several other distros are using; their "feature updates" repositories are always underused by maintainers, poorly supported, used by many users in a selective fashion (which causes dependency issues) etc. It also means there are effectively 2 incompatible versions of "Fedora n", unless we ban library upgrades altogether, which makes it impossible to provide e.g. a current KDE (something which also plagues other distros' implementations of this idea; often, KDE updates are in yet another separate repo etc.). I think the way we've been handling this – upgrade or get lost – is the only one that works. That said, of course I prefer having an 'optional repo for feature updates' than not being allowed to push them on Fedora infrastructure at all. It's just that I doubt about the viability of the idea. I also have some concern about the actual implementation: I've read that one idea that was floated was to shut down updates-features for Fn after the Fn+1 release. But that means people who use updates-features effectively have their support cycle cut by half! (It is not feasible to downgrade to the conservative updates, and the stuff installed from updates-features also requires security fixes!) (And in fact this kind of second-class support is exactly one of the problems of having the features relegated to a separate repo.) Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel