> > For me the most important benefit is OS independent software, especially > web browser. > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > Debates like this expose a weakness in packaging philosophy. The current philosophy seems to be all packages are equal. An update to Open/Libre Office is handled the same as an update to the kernel or glibc. It seems like in mainstream Linux distros your options often are: 1) Wait 6 months for new software. 2) Download / build from source and deal with system integration issues. 3) Download unofficial package. The reality is that not all packages are equal, and some could/should be pushed faster than others. Firefox and Libreoffice are good examples of this. If parallel installs of Xulrunner are needed, in my opinion, so be it. Ultimately, packaging philosophy could hold back/prevent mainstream (i.e. non power user) Linux adoption. These users will ask themselves "I can get the latest version well integrated on release day using Windows or Mac, why not Linux?". Ubuntu is moving (once again in my opinion) in the correct direction with its combination of LTS (a stable base) and PPAs for more rapid updates of things like Firefox. The fact that they have LTS tagging also prevents the question of "How many versions to support?". The answer is clear: two, the current LTS and the latest 6 month release. Finally, with packaging cycles changing might it be time to revisit the decision to merge Fedora Core and Extras? Creating separate repos with different goals might be wise. I apologize for the long rant. -- Mark Bidewell http://www.linkedin.com/in/markbidewell -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
