On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 22:26:46 -0400, you wrote: >I can't tell people Fedora is the best if it's not carrying the latest >upstream KDE, its just not possible. I'm constantly recruiting new >users. I'm in regular contact with the team of people who run >Techrights. > >If a new release of KDE comes out, this is what happens currently > >1) Kubuntu adds a backports PPA. Stable users do not get the latest KDE. >2) openSUSE will have it in their KDE Factory Repo, and it will turn >into a release Repo later (not stable). Stable users do not get the >latest KDE. >3) Mandriva will have official packages on kde.org but they aren't >pushed as updates. Stable users do not get the latest KDE. >4) Fedora will have it entirely unofficially as a third party repo for >a few weeks, it will also be in the official repo in updates-testing >and then in updates. Stable users DO get the latest KDE. > >This makes Fedora BETTER than the rest. For your particular definition of better, which does not necessarily agree with anyone elses defintion of better. > If we delegate the latest KDE >to backports like everyone else, how does that make Fedora better? And >we do want to be better than everyone else if we want to compete with >Apple and Microsoft. How does shipping out possiblity disruptive changes mid-release help us compete with anyone else? Or make us better than anyone else? -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
