<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Brandon Lozza <span dir="ltr"></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">
<div></div><br>
</div>The user has to tolerate some change. We can't cater to people who<br>
never upgrade which seems to be what is taking place. Especially with<br>
the fact that our end of life happens sooner, users must already<br>
expect a constant stream of updates. If they want more stability they<br>
should be using RHEL, CentOS or Scientific Linux, Debian Stable,<br>
Ubuntu LTS which do put the focus on non disruptiveness.<br></blockquote><div><br>People who don't update are not doing so precisely because there was too much disruption. Mocking them as lazy is just dismissing valid concerns probably because those who do so have never worked on a large scale deployment on the client side. We will have to have to cut down on that post release. Obviously cutting it off entirely is not possible but updates shouldn't change the behaviour of software to the extend that the users feel alienated. CentOS is too old for desktops and certainly doesn't support any recent hardware. So it is not a option for a lot of users. The other end being Rawhide. <br>
<br>Rahul<br> </div></div>