On 27. 11. 18 16:49, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 10:40 AM Owen Taylor <otaylor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
One of the key parts of making a decision to delay/skip F31 is
figuring out, ahead of the decision, what the expected experience is
for users and packagers. Does F30 have normal stability, or do we try
to keep users happy by moving things forward with ad-hoc updates and
cross-our-fingers and hope nothing breaks?
I tend to think about this in terms of GNOME - would we rebase to
GNOME 3.34 in the middle of F30 or not? But there's a lot of other
pieces of software where similar considerations apply: container
tools, cockpit, NetworkManager, etc.
And if we did do updates like that, would we consider respinning media
and making a "F30.1"?
As came up in another part of the earlier thread, I think this is an
opportunity for Modularity. For those things like GNOME that want to
rev mid-release, if they shipped the 3.34 release as new stream, those
that want to move to it will have that option, and those who fear
change can remain on the 3.32 release, even if it's not getting
support. This would have to be something communicated at release-time
of course.
I'd argue that this adds unnecessary work to packagers.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
_______________________________________________
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
