Re: Fedora major feature introduction; was Re: /usrmove?
On 02/10/2012 04:51 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
On 02/09/2012 11:45 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Let me put it this way: I am having difficulties in recalling any Fedora
> release which worked for me out of the box ...
...
> That said, IMO, on the technical side, Fedora urgently needs a "calming
> down/lean back/settlement phase", say 2 consecutive Fedora releases
> without "revolutionary features" being introduced, to revisit
> re-evaluate, revert/complete "old revolutionary features".
To me, Fedora is the Linux R&D lab, and the releases are designed to
introduce new features.
Well, to me Fedora is an advanced end-user development-oriented distro.
Being a 1st generation Linux user, who has been using Linux for approx.
20 years and being a developer, I don't have much of a problem with
facing an occasional bug every now and then, but I feel Fedora is trying
to rush it too fast and is stumbling over its own feet.
Still, you have a point about the worrying
number of defects (I am personally affected by one of those: my X is
misbehaving now, with terrible latency and update performance)---but I
think we need to adjust the process rather than make strategic retreats.
Hmm, I am
facing what I assume to "losing focus" issues and am facing
thunderbird and firefox segfaults every 24-48 hours ;)
Specifically, in my opinion the major developments should be planned
and
announced in a more organized way:
- they are first proposed, discussed, adopted and announced in the
timeframe of 1 or 2 releases before the release they go in.
- they are introduced, on schedule and as a matter of process, into
rawhide at the start of the cycle, rather than midstream or late.
There are of course difficulties with this approach: first, it could
slow down the development just because it adds steps to the process.
I would not consider a slow down to be a disadvantage. It would provide
devs more time to develop and to test in their labs and provide other
parties (packagers, upstreams, users) more time to adapt to on-going
developments. It also likely would reduce the impresson of Fedora users
being utilized as "Guinea Pigs" and Fedora being rawhide snapshots.
Perhaps more importantly, many important improvements are driven by
small groups or individuals
Some people will likely find this inappropriate, but I
see a direct
connection between certain individuals and the shape of Fedora.
Ralf