On 11/14/18 12:36 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > > So, what would this look like? I have some ideas, but, really, there > are many possibilities. That's what this thread is for. Let's figure it > out. How would we structure repositories? How would we make sure we're > not overworked? How would we balance this with getting people new stuff > fast as well? > I know that 13 month for hardware vendors is quite short. Some of them have processes for approving minor updates that take 6 month or longer. We don't talk about a new kernel update here, we really talk about a simple update of a client application in the IoT world. So good so far, it makes sense that they are quite unhappy with Fedora 13 month release cycles. At the same time, one of the main reasons I use fedora is because updates are so smooth in the recent releases. I think that's something we can bring to IoT devices as well. With ostree and the newer ways of upgrading systems it's definitely possible to upgrade software quite fail safe. I would go for one more release cycle that is supported (18-19 months) instead of going for full LTS. Since LTS is really something I think CentOS and RHEL should do. 10 years is LTS. 36 month is only half way, and when we want IoT devices to become more secure in the long term, I think we should work on making them safer and easier to update instead of setting up an LTS which then causes ugly breaking during upgrades which we see on Ubuntu and other places. At least that's my experience and why I would like to avoid an LTS life cycle. And 36 or 48 months are quite short for IoT (think about the toaster you bought. How old is it?) but quite long in the world of software. And for Vendors of notebooks and desktops, I think the upgrade process is ready to work for end users. Especially on defaults. When we look here to Windows, with Windows 10 they do exactly that. Providing a Release that lasts 6 month (+ something for business) and then is updated. We do this for 15 years now and quite smooth, so why change? 13 months are completely fine for a desktop. Finally people. We have resource, but not an infinite number of them. We have so many projects we are working on and right now automatic various of our existing projects already takes so much work time that adding more release cycles would only make it harder. Especially with back porting all the fixes to the then LTS. And besides that I guess most people who want an LTS outside of the IoT world, would go for CentOS anyway. So may let's see if we can bring CentOS and RHEL towards IoT instead of bringing CentOS and RHEL to Fedora. I hope/guess the way for the latter is way shorter. -- Signed Sheogorath
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
