Am 28.05.2015 um 21:58 schrieb Michael Catanzaro:
On Thu, 2015-05-28 at 14:39 -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:Do you think the tech could stabilize enough to obviate the first reason? The 6-month workflow cadence remains a good idea, of course, but could result in a major offline upgrade, instead of an entire new distribution.I think we're already at the point where -- at least for Fedora Workstation (not sure about Server/Cloud), and except for infrastructure issues -- we can stop branding our releases with a version number, and simply have a particularly big offline update every six months. Behind-the-scenes, we still have the six-month cycle, but this is hidden to users. They get Fedora and it's just Fedora, not Fedora 21 or Fedora 22. People stop complaining about the 13-months of support that isn't long enough for them: we wouldn't have that short support window anymore, instead there is *indefinite* support so long as you take your monthly QAed updates pack (five small updates packs, then a big updates pack, then five smaller ones, then a big one, ...). This is the model Windows is moving to, and it makes a lot of sense to me
when i hear "offline update" i have enough at allfrankly what people really need is relieable and fast *online updates* and not taking the esay road "well go offline" and that works pretty well over many years now *with expierience* what services you need to restart and if you should log off or just close specific applicatoons and start them again
giving up and say "meh i am not able and so go offline" may work for some part of the userbase, that maybe even fine *as long* efforts to continue what we have now for many many years for advanced users won't die
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
