Stable Release Updates types proposal (was Re: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2010-03-11)

[Thomas Janssen]

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 2:24 AM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/12/2010 06:52 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>
>>> If you don't even agree with a basic principle that breaking ABI should be
>>> avoided in updates, we don't really have much left to discuss.
>>>
>> I don't see this as being a "basic principle" at all. For an enterprise
>> distro like RHEL or CentOS, sure. But not for something like Fedora. What
>> counts is that all software in Fedora depending on the library gets rebuilt
>> and pushed at the same time. (That's what grouped updates are for.) We do
>> not support third-party software.
>>
> I disagree.  Imagining that we are living in a island where no software
> exists outside the repository is just delusional and the assumption that
> everyone has the bandwidth to deal with all that churn is wrong as
> well.  I should make people sit in a dial-up connection and have them
> update software now and then to bring them back to the ground.

And i disagree here. People like that have to face that Fedora or any
similar distro isn't for them.
If they live in dial-up-land, they should use something like RHEL,
CentOS, Debian stable or whatever.
OR they learn to read documentation, understand the packagemanagement
and how to update only security fixes.

-- 
LG Thomas

Dubium sapientiae initium