On 01/24/2012 07:13 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > > How is rawhide not a rolling release? Or perhaps better asked, what > about rawhide makes it > unsuitable for use as a rolling Fedora release? Actually it is totally unsuitable for a stable rolling release. A rolling release, as most mean it these days, is a stable release - with testing and development repos (rawhide is just the latter). A key point of a rolling release is that it offers a continuous series of smaller changes rather than 1 big change every 6 -9 months (or 2 years in case of enterprise). Once you've installed a rolling release there are no more 'big annoying upgrades' ... really ideal for servers and brilliant for the desktop. For the enterprise - many may prefer quarterly updates rather than huge updates every few years. Further, for those bigger changes (initd, gnome-shell whatever) - one only has to deal with a single thing changing - which can easily be backed out if its a problem (think systemd) - and not the compound impact of multiple large changes. In my view, a rolling release model is the way forward - for foss and enterprise both. It is the standard model for much if not most software devel in the commercial world - as well as the linux kernel, mozilla, google chrome etc). It makes a lot of sense ... and offers a great business opportunity on the enterprise side as well - switching to a rolling release model for fedora could be a really huge win. imho of course :- Fedora suffers an additional problem it seems - not only are there large changes as part of many releases, but lately some of them immediately stop being supported until the 'next big release' - which makes fedora far less reliable and desirable - examples of this are systemd and pulse audio - there may be others. gene - user since RH3. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
