On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 10:38:52AM -0500, Owen Taylor 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"? Umm... can't we treat it the same as the Fedora 20/21 situation? Skipping a GNOME release can be a bit painful for the upstream GNOME community, which is overwhelmingly tilted towards Fedora, but it's not the end of the world either. After all, I don't think the longer Fedora 21 cycle had any negative long-term effect on that group at all. :) The Desktop Team could more aggressively backport bug-fixes to GNOME 3.34 upstream, and if needed backport selected features to Fedora 30 downstream. We have done this during the usual six month Fedora releases (eg., Thunderbolt support, free RHEL in Boxes, etc.), and we have done this for RHEL too, so there's some precedence in this area. _______________________________________________ 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
