Another great update

[Peter Boy]

Am Sonntag, den 07.03.2010, 12:18 +0200 schrieb Debarshi Ray:
> > Others may be eager to test their software with 5.3, but can not spend
> > the time to make a system update to F12.
> 
> All Koji builds are done using the same packages in the repository.
> eg., if Fedora has GCC x.y then GCC x.y is used to built the entire
> Fedora tree. Suddenly bumping a GCC version will cause a lot of builds
> to fail. 

The 5.3 example was referring to php! There are different kinds of
updates which should be handled differently.

An update to some software may render the complete system useless - the
case of gcc. Others may have selective effects - the case of php (and
might be easily handled by a selective roll back).

The KDE update, which got the current discussion rolling, might be an
example of the former. 

Instead of banning release updates completely (the convervative
approach) it might be advantageous, to use different strength /
different levels of testing (dwell time in testing repo, positive Karma,
etc).

> > You got the point. Therefore people are using Fedora and expect to get
> > newer software versions which may provide additional functions which may
> > come in handy, as soon as possible.
> 
> Does 6 months not count as "as soon as possible"?

It depends. When e.g. OpenOffice releases a new version, I would be very
unhappy to have 6 months to wait. If a new kernel can handle my
broadband adapter I would be very unhappy to wait 6 months until I can
use it (milage of others will vary, but the same basic logic).


> Often "new and shiny" can mean "new bugs". 

Of course! That's the other side of the coin (to be able to use new
functions, test the effects of a release to ones own development, not to
have to use an outdated (but very stable) software level as RHEL/CentOS,
etc).

 
> That is what makes Rawhide
> (or today's F13) what it is. 

No! Rawhide affects the disto as a whole. Installation procedure may be
broken, hardware recognition, incompatible libs. Rawhide is not meant to
be stable all the time. A Fedora release is meant to be stable, but
sometimes something breaks as an accident, as a side effect of another,
partly rival goal (to provide a curent software level).



But to be honest, how often such an accident did occur over the last
years? You won't need more than one hand to count.

And how long did it take to resolve a problem? In most cases you had
just to wait a day.


Fedora is my day by day working instrument, and I am "happy with Fedora
as is"(tm)


Peter