On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 11:47:15AM +0200, Gerhard Hueller wrote:
Guys, if you can't hold release dates, please keep at least the
distribution up-to-date. It is done with the kernel, so why aren't other
critical parts of the system handled in a rolling-release like way?
The idea of "not holding release dates" is a misconception about how our
scheduling process works. Release dates are meant to be targets, not
deadlines, and our process is based on fulfilling release criteria, not what
the clock says.
Within a stable release, we try to minimize disruption as a matter of
policy. This is always a balancing act: everyone wants the newest cake, and
wants stability to eat too.
If you are very eager for the latest — and it sounds like you are! — I
encourage you to try the alpha release, or even run Rawhide, as I do.
Or, if Mesa is your primary concern, you might also contact Felix Schwarz
about making a Mesa 10.3 Copr, as he did with 10.1 previously before that
hit the distribution — take a look at
In general, Coprs are a better approach than disruptive distro updates,
because it lets people who want the new shiny to assume the risk — *and*, to
only take that risk in the areas they care about, rather than the "all in!"
approach of Rawhide.
Fedora Project Leader