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

[Rahul Sundaram]

On 03/12/2010 05:03 PM, Thomas Janssen wrote:
>
> I wasn't answering the ABI stability part. But the people-in-dial-up-land part.
>   

It is interconnected in my argument and doesn't make sense to debate in
parts.  If you avoid breaking ABI stability, you can avoid unnecessary
churn and one of the benefits ( think resource cost - infrastructure,
mirrors etc)  of that is users with low bandwidth systems being able to
take advantage of Fedora more.  While you can always brush off any
suggestion with a position of "take it or leave it", it is importance to
recognize that there is room for improvement.    If we didn't care about
people with low bandwidth systems, we wouldn't be having yum-presto and
LZMA compressed RPMS  So claiming that users with such systems should
just go away doesn't fit into the development efforts already made to
accommodate such users.

Rahul