2012/11/3 Nikos Roussos <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:comzeradd@fedoraproject.org" target="_blank">comzeradd@fedoraproject.org</a>></span><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<u></u>
<div><div class="im">
On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 13:22 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
</div><div class="im"><blockquote type="CITE">
<pre>> I disagree with that. Fedora releases had some small regression
> introduced via updates from time but is is *very* usable as a stable
> operating system.
I disagree. It's usable by the kind of people who use Fedora. Who like
shiny cutting-edge stuff and don't mind dealing with wonkiness
constantly.
</pre>
</blockquote></div>
I mind. So do many Fedora users and contributors, who want a shiny *stable* leading edge (not bleeding edge) linux distribution.<div class="im"><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<pre>I wouldn't dream of putting any regular person on a Fedora
install, quite frankly. It's easy to get into a perspective bubble where
Fedora looks normal, but it isn't. It is not a stable general-purpose
operating system and it's absurd to represent it as such.
</pre>
</blockquote></div>
I understand that "regular users" are not Fedora's main target, but it is a general-purpose operating system in the sense that it can be used by people who want to have a stable working environment with all the latest things from the Open Source world.<br>
<br>
In that sense, and from my point of view, if we had to rethink our release model and dedicate time and energy on a new approach, it would make more sense to have an extended support release (providing only security updates after 13 months) which is vital for the enterprise desktop market. Of course this is not in contradiction with having a rolling release model alongside, but I didn't know if we have enough human capacity to do them both.<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>--<br>
devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:devel@lists.fedoraproject.org">devel@lists.fedoraproject.org</a><br>
<a href="https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel" target="_blank">https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel</a><br></blockquote></div><br><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">The guys behind </span><span class="" style="color:rgb(34,34,34);background-color:yellow">openSUSE</span><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"> created a good approach with Tumbleweed. By adding this </span><span class="" style="color:rgb(34,34,34);background-color:yellow">repo</span><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"> users can opt-in to the (semi)rolling model.</span><div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
Tumbleweed is more like a pool where updated, stable, non disruptive software can be installed and I was able to talk to the guy who created Tumbleweed some time ago. He said that it is easy to maintain and takes only a few minutes a day to check things.</div>
<div style="color:rgb(34,34,34);background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">It is difficult, for example, to understand why we have to wait until the next release to have LibreOffice 3.6, since this seems an non disruptive update that could bring major improvements in the productivity of users who rely on office suites to work.</div>
<div><br></div>-- <br>Henrique "LonelySpooky" Junior<br><div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:15px"><a href="http://about.me/henriquejunior" target="_blank">http://about.me/henriquejunior</a></div>
</div><br>