On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 01:06:21PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Pavel Raiskup wrote: > > Ok, I agree that Fedora needs modules for life-cycle separation. > > I don't. I consider what you call "life-cycle separation" (I'd rather call > it "inconsistent EOLs") a bug rather than a feature. > > This is yet another of those "features" that sound great on paper, but lead > to a horrible user experience in practice. Right now, it is easy to know > when you have to upgrade, as there is one EOL for the entire distro. With > inconsistent per-module EOLs, as soon as you have a non-trivial amount of > modules installed, it is impossible to track down when you need to upgrade > what. So either you end up with an unsupported version of the module without > even noticing, or you get forcefully upgraded at what will often be the > worst possible time. But you get upgraded even now. Firefox gets major-version upgrades even within the life of the Fedora version, as do other packages. Yes, it might become a mess if the tooling is not right or clear. But it is also an opportunity to potentially get a choice between stay on the old, stable, vs. get the latest greatest. -- Jan Pazdziora Senior Principal Software Engineer, OpenShift Security Team, Red Hat _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
