RFC: Fedora revamp proposal

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 23:23:35 +0100
Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:

> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Why? if we reverted no work would have gone on on the new codebase
> 
> That's the whole problem. The Anaconda team cannot manage to develop
> in a branch or trunk which is only put into Rawhide when it's ready.

Well, sure they can. But they don't have sufficient resources to do
that and _ALSO_ maintain the old code base. 

> Somehow all other upstreams manage, even where they happen to be Red
> Hat and/or Fedora developers.

An installer isn't like those things. 

So, to recap: 

1) You can have old anaconda for f19, at the cost of no one being able
to work on the new one. Leading to f20 having the exact same issue. 

or

2) You can take the longer release time, get the new codebase in and
done and then you are in much better shape moving forward. 

We choose 2. 

(Anaconda folks, feel free to drop in and correct me if I got anything
wrong). 

I can't see much way to explain it in more detail, so I think I will
leave it at that. 

kevin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130313/46c999d8/attachment.sig>