Re: Two more concrete ideas for what a once-yearly+update schedule would look like

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 2:32 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
<dominik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thursday, 08 December 2016 at 19:26, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> [...]
>> I would like to see us stop pushing non security updates to updates from
>> updates-testing entirely and do it in monthly batches instead.  we would push
>> daily security fixes and updates-testing.  However this would make atomic host
>> 2 week releases much less useful, as there would be no updates except for once
>> a month.
>
> You gave just one disadvantage of this proposal and no advantages at
> all. Why do you think the above is a good idea? I, for one, do not like
> waiting a month to get bug fixes that are not security-related. We are
> not RHEL or Microsoft or Adobe. I'm convinced that having bug fixes
> available as soon as they're ready is valuable (even if you choose to
> wait before installing them). Also, as was pointed out elsewhere in this
> subthread, updates get tested only after they're released to stable very
> often, so it's also valuable to get the feedback earlier rather than in
> a month.


I keep hearing different opinions on update frequency, and it suggests
a discoverable dial is needed on the users' end of this equation.

-- 
Chris Murphy
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux