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
