Stable Release Updates types proposal

[Al Dunsmuir]

Hello Simo,

Friday, March 12, 2010, 3:42:41 PM, you wrote:

> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:21:41 +0100
> Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:

>> The problem with all the proposals centered on the idea of N-1 as 
>> conservative, N as less conservative, including yours above and
>> jreznik's, is that it forces all the people who expect a constant
>> type of updates to upgrade twice as often, i.e. twice a year.
>> Especially for the conservative folks, this will be a big annoyance.
>> With low bandwidths, you have to get a CD/DVD shipped each time! In
>> addition, I think the inconsistency will confuse our users a lot.

Fedora  has  traditionally  supported upgrading from not just N-1, but
also  N-2.  Folks often skip releases, especially if they are aware of
problems (such as the pulseaudio and X issues) with a new release.

> I think you have to decide if you are siding for people with low
> bandwidth or cutting them out.
> You just said we cannot cater to people with low bandwidth.
> Well stick with your point and don't swindle as soon as it doesn't help
> you win an argument for argument sake ...

> Users are confused and annoyed by too frequent upgrades. Those people
> are fine sticking with N and then N-1 until security updates are no
> more, and only jumping from N-1 to N+1 once a year. This includes many
> developers I can assure you.
> Simo.

I've  also  run  into cases where I tried to upgrade, but it failed to
install.   I  restored  from backups, and kept using the older release
until  I  had  time  to  do  a  fresh  install.   I  do not believe my
experience is unique.