On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 22:49 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > So did I, and I think his proposal is an awful idea. (Unfortunately, > question time at DevConf is always very short, so I didn't get to voice my > disapproval in the talk.) We are not Window$ (think "patch Tuesday") nor > RHEL. We're a distribution with "First" as one of its main objectives. Our > users do not want to wait up to a month for updates! I also don't think such > huge batches can realistically be tested. > > Kevin Kofler > Well this is a really easy one to solve; "update bundling" probably isn't necessary. Already PackageKit has a setting to control how often it checks for updates: hourly, daily (default), or weekly. Just add a monthly option, and change the default to something more sane than daily (weekly sounds like a better default than daily or monthly?); people who want faster updates can still get them (not the case if you start holding updates). That should be really simple. Alternatively, add a new setting for security updates so that those come daily by default while other updates are weekly (or monthly or annually or whatever) by default; not sure how much work that would be, but PackageKit already distinguishes between security and nonsecurity updates.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
