alpha/beta software in Fedora 8?
Chuck Anderson
cra at WPI.EDU
Tue Nov 27 16:03:02 UTC 2007
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 04:25:35PM +0100, Adam Tkac wrote:
> I've put this software to F8 because it has nice new features. Some
> bugs is tax for them. Additionally I don't think that users use newest
> Fedora on important servers and 9.5 will come into beta stage very
> soon.
I use the newest Fedora on important servers. They were running FC6
before, and the EOL is approaching soon. I'd rather upgrade once to
F8 now rather than F7 now and then again to F8 when F9 is released. I
guess that was a bad decision on my part, but I've never had major
problems on servers with the latest Fedora before. I've been testing
F8 as Rawhide for a while now, so I thought it was ready for my
servers. Unfortunately, I didn't test BIND--slap my wrist for that
one. Of course, who knows if I would have encountered this problem in
a test server--it may be related to the load one puts on the server
that would never have been seen in a test environment.
I don't mind beta software and release candidates of software in a
stable Fedora release--heck lots of software stays in that phase for a
long long time (ISC dhcpd for example). But alpha software I think is
pushing it a bit too far. This is just my opinion, and I will work
around whatever problems I cause for myself by using the latest Fedora
on my important servers, but the lack of a policy on this makes it
hard for sysadmins to choose correctly. Now it seems that the choice
should be "always run the previous Fedora release because the newest
one might introduce new software that is considered alpha quality by
upstream".
It is a fine line to walk on stability vs. new features. Fedora is
about being on the leading edge, sure. But bleeding edge should be
reserved for Rawhide and Test releases. Especially for software as
important as BIND and DHCP.
More information about the devel
mailing list