It's not like dnf-system-upgrade would magically stop working when
reaches EOL, so honestly, overall, I just don't really see the problem
Like most of Fedora, dnf-system-upgrade gets limited testing before
release. When N is released, a large number of users who did not install
N-1 will think it is time to upgrade before their current N-2 reaches
End-of-Life in four weeks. These users will try system-upgrade from a
much larger set of initial states than could be tested before release.
This is the time the greatest number of (N-2 to N) problems will be found.
It is also the time when problems in the brand-new release N are most
likely, as users of N-1 eagerly try N.
With an abundance of bug reports in the just-released N, and some new
reports of problems with N-2 that will be closed by EOL in a handful of
days, where do you think maintenance should focus?
I admit this view is based on what is probable, not on actual fact. My
point is not do this or avoid that, I want the Fedora user to have an
accurate understanding of upgrade choices.
My reading of the EOL policy says "If it isn't fixed before EOL, it is
unlikely to be fixed." If I encounter a problem with release-skipping
system-upgrade, too bad. There is probably no time to fix it before EOL.
In effect, release-skipping system-upgrade is not supported. Either I
upgrade every release (when system-upgrade is supported and bug fixes are
likely), I plan to do a new install, or I hope to be lucky with EOL code.
That is not a bad set of choices. Bad is a user in trouble because he
reasonably thought they were different. "Release-skipping system-upgrade
is a release-blocking requirement" sounds likely to obscure the support
risks that attend its use.
Fedora is certainly better for a robust system-upgrade facility. No
point is filing bugs now for my 21-23 failure, though. 21 is EOL, and
the failure did not occur with 22.