KDE vs. GNOME on F10

[Mark Bidewell]

On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Adam Miller<maxamillion at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Adam Williamson<awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
> <snip>
>> We've had this discussion before, but to re-state my opinion: the only
>> sane way to handle this is multiple, discretionary update repositories.
>> A repository for security and stable bugfix updates, and a repository
>> for other updates - major version bumps whose purpose isn't solely to
>> fix a security issue or, with minimal changes, a clearly identified bug.
>>
>> It's more work, but it's the only workable consistent system that
>> doesn't restrict some maintainer from being able to do what they want to
>> do. A distribution with much fewer resources than Fedora (Mandriva) has
>> been using this system successfully, to the satisfaction of developers
>> and users, for several releases now.
>>
>> The system gives users the flexibility to choose whether they want a
>> 'traditional' stable update system, or a more adventurous,
>> version-upgrading system. And maintainers can choose whether or not they
>> want to take on the work of shipping updates in the adventurous
>> repository. In all cases, users and maintainers both know what each
>> repository is for, and what they'll be getting depending on which they
>> choose to use.
> <snip>
>
> +1
>
> Would definitely be one way to solve this sort of problem.
>
> -Adam
>
>
>
> --
> http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> ()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
> /\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments
>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>

+1

OpenSUSE buildservice does this and it is nice to be able to pull
things like latest OpenOffice, etc.

-- 
Mark Bidewell
http://www.linkedin.com/in/markbidewell