FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

James Antill <james at fedoraproject.org> writes:

>> > [...]
>> > ...but they have almost no options if they are happy to stay with
>> > the software that they have.
>> 
>> Doesn't "just not running random/unrestricted yum update" exactly
>> encode that option?
>
>  No, for two reasons:
>
> 1. The user is often informed, from various sources, that they should
> apply updates. We even want users to do that.

OK, but then we're not talking about the person who's happy to stay
with the software they have, but about a more typical person who is
not too risk-averse and is willing to consider unsolicited updates.
Those are different dudes.

> Of course the assumption with that advise is that there aren't that
> many updates, and they will mainly be severe bug fixes and security
> fixes ...

Fedora updates may be classified, but perhaps not granularly enough.
An update can include a mixture of security fixes, serious bug fixes,
minor bug fixes, new features, and of course risks such as changed
configuration files, new known bugs.  Perhaps a new update could be
scored by the maintainer on all these scales, so that the client
update interface can easily filter/sort to the preferred top few.

> and they will have gone through a lot of testing. 

Well, this being Fedora, "a lot of testing" is always a matter of
faith.


- FChE