On Thu, May 20, 2021, at 12:31 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > Then maybe FCOS needs to have a major version number to indicate that > these breaks are going to happen. I am going to say off the bat it DOES > NOT need to be the same as the Fedora Linux release number. It also > doesn't mean that number change means that you can't move a system from > say FCOS-1 to FCOS-2... but that you make no promises of moving it back > to FCOS-1. I do think we should probably have a page which lists "provisioning discontinuities" as I'd call it where newly provisioned nodes have an important new behavior. That's related to, but not the same thing as a version number. > Eventually something is going to cause this. The many changes like: > cgroups etc are adding up to an area where FCOS will reach a point it > only 'matches' Fedora in name and might as well be based off of Debian > Jessie or Slackware 14.2 or CentOS-8 Stream. I think an even moderately objective analysis would show that statement to be simply hyperbole. If you meant it that way, it wasn't useful to say. If you didn't, please think about it more and particularly consider all the linkages FCOS has with other Fedora editions. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
