On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 01:43:58PM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> I'm not sure it's much harder to do without modularity. Right now
> Fedora could do a Fedora 26 release without any conventional release
> media for server and workstation, by just using dnf system-upgrade and
> gnome-software. And in a sense that's more like how the incremental
> release for rpm-ostree based installations end up working out anyway.
True.
> Would Fedora 26.1 be a branch off Rawhide, or a branch off Fedora 26
> with relaxed rules about what sorts of things can be significantly
> updated? A huge part of the effort for each release is sun baking the
> rawhide. And what effect does a once a year major release have on
> Rawhide? Or what effect do we want it to have?
I was thinking a branch off of 26 with relaxed rules. I'm not sure what
the EOL policy would be like — could be any of
* treat both .0 and .1 releases as we do full releases now (which would
make each release go EOL a month after the *next* .0 or .1)
* end the .1 release support at the same time .0 ends
* make the .1 point a big update bundle and not support .0 after that,
but taking the whole thing around to after the next .1
Rawhide is a good question. I'd like to see the more-stable-rawhide
("Bikeshed!") idea in place, and hopefully more people running that,
making it more likely that Rawhide is at a good place for stabilization
when we branch for the annual release.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Fedora Project Leader
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
