The question of rolling release?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:53:32 +0100
Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> Am 24.01.2012 15:48, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
> > On 01/24/2012 08:09 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> >> On 01/24/2012 09:08 AM, Michal Schmidt wrote:
> >>> On 01/24/2012 02:13 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> >>>>    Fedora suffers an additional problem it seems - not only are
> >>>> there large changes as part of many releases, but lately some of
> >>>> them immediately stop being supported until the 'next big
> >>>> release' - which makes fedora far less reliable and desirable -
> >>>> examples of this are systemd and pulse audio - there may be
> >>>> others.
> >>>
> >>> What the ...?
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>    systemd 26 vs 37/38 ... tho you're right yes there were/are some
> >> damage control fixes ... which is the point - in a rolling release
> >> model things like this would (should) get the proper attention
> >> they need, instead of moving focus on to the 'next release' ...
> > 
> > You are ridding on thin ice here.  systemd gets many many updates.
> > Claiming that it doesnt receive proper attention is very much
> > unsubstantiated.  I think you should go back on this claim.
> 
> where are they for F15?
> 
> systemd-26-14.fc15
> systemd-37-9.fc16
> 
> this is BAD because the version in F15 was a really EARLY state
> services for F16 like cups rely on systemd-features that do NOT
> exist in F15 - so you have no chance converting sysv to systemd
> in an easy way on your F15 installation
> 
> this is NOT "receive proper attention"

You are blindly looking at version numbers here. ;) 

Take a look at the number of patches where fixes and other enhancements
have been backported to the F16/F15 packages: 

https://community.dev.fedoraproject.org/packages/systemd

(Use the Fedora 16 release from the pulldown there). 

The maintainer(s) are backporting those items that are safe to
backport. 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20120124/7542f850/attachment.sig>