On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 11:20:49 AM CET Matthew Miller wrote: > 1. I believe in the value of releases, for the project and for end > users — as opposed to a "rolling release" system. But major releases > are a lot of work across the project — not just release engineering, > but marketing, ambassadors, design, docs, and others. One possible > way to reduce this is to have major releases less frequently. I want > a cadence that gives us the highest return on effort. Maybe that's > six months — and maybe it isn't. I believe in both -- and I believe Fedora could have both -- "rolling release" and "major releases" as a separate "products". There are people in the wild who will never use Fedora as the workstation system because they seek for rolling distro (while Rawhide is _almost_ there). It is sad we loose those users. > I suggested one release a year as an alternative to the current two per > year. I don't have a strong opinion here ... but I personally like the idea about annual "major release" cycle (supporting one stable fedora for 2Y+). > The proposals previously in this thread are ideas aimed at presenting > users with an annual release from a marketing/ambassadors/design, etc., > point of view, but also addressing our upstream stakeholders' desire to > have Fedora ship their software fast. (For example, GNOME.) Would the 'rolling release' approach help WRT upstream stakeholders, even if we had longer major release cycle? Pavel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
