Hi all! Jeremy Katz schrieb: > On Mon, 2006-06-26 at 01:02 +0100, Jose' Matos wrote: >> <rant> >> Fedora seems sometime a schizophrenic distribution, sometimes some packages >> are updated to the last available stable version, sometimes not. > To some extent, this is what you're *always* going to get if you have > more than one person maintaining all of the packages. Different people > will have different comfort levels with doing upgrades (and want to do > different things first). The relationship the maintainer has with the > upstream also plays a part. I wondering if we might need "update guidelines" (note: guidelines, *not* policy) in the longer term. To give an example: What I really like in Fedora Core are the the updates to the latest kernel-versions (like the update to 2.6.17 some days ago) because you I get a lot of new drivers for new hardware this way (*1). But a kernel-update also bears risk to break things. Okay, yes, I still have a older version on my harddisk when the new one breaks -- but if the new kernel doesn't boot on the only-remotely-accessible webserver I might be in trouble. So in the case of the kernel my vote for a update guideline would be: Updating to the latest kernel is fine for the current stable distribution (FC5 currently), but it IMHO should be avoided for stable-1 (FC-4 currently)? Why? Well, mainly for two reasons - because most users that want the latest and greatest software are on FC5 (or devel) already - those that still run FC4 have machines that work fine and are probably mostly glad Yes, I can hear davej already saying "having to maintain two codebases for FC4 and FC5 is much more work than maintaining one kernel version for both". Yes, I can understand that argument. But FC4 will be in maintain-mode soon (three to four weeks) anyway so I think in this special case FC4 should have sticked with 2.6.16. Just my 2 cent CU thl *1 -- /me really hopes that FC5 gets a update of X.org to 7.1 soon because that way we would improve hardware support even more (FC5 still has no support for Intels 945GM IIRC and that's really frustrating :-/ ). Updated X-drivers would also be a good start, but it seems that's still a hard job even in times of modular X. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
