Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 16:26 +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
Arjan van de Ven wrote:
If X.Org 7.1 is made available as an official upgrade to Fedora 5 when
the Fedora Project/Red Hat are aware that it will break systems that
are in use across companies and institutions then Fedora will lose
credibility and trust with the administrators of those systems, which
will damage the reputation of Fedora/Red Hat, as well as convince
those organizations to look into alternatives where stability within a
release is valued as it used to be with Red Hat.
by this argument Fedora wouldn't be able to release updated kernels
including those with urgent security fixes.
There is a difference between breaking things accidentally (a risk that you
can never completely avoid) and breaking things deliberately and knowingly.
quite often it is known that a kernel update breaks binary drivers. In
fact that's the expected behavior (see stable_api_nonsense.txt as well
as the OLS keynote of this year at
http://www.kroah.com/log/2006/07/23/#ols_2006_keynote to see why), so I
still don't see the difference...
This discussion is not about the linux kernel, but about the Fedora
distro. And certainly the goal of a linux distribution is to provide a
smooth experience. So if you're going to push an update that you know is
going to inconvenience, say, 10% of your user base, you have to ask
yourself some hard questions, no matter what the update or the
inconvenience are.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
