The question of rolling release?

[Jef Spaleta]

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 7:47 PM, Nathanael Noblet <nathanael at gnat.ca> wrote:
> So far I've seen lots of discussion about can we do it, but no proposal nor
> any real set of why it would be better. Does it reduce packaging work? Does
> it do X Y Z? Why would I *want* a rolling release?


So far I'm not thrilled with what I've read in the historic Arch
archives concerning how major subsystem changes are handled in their
rolling fashion.
I would not use, nor would I admin, a distribution which dropped GNOME
3 as a rolling update to GNOME 2 for users like Arch did. And I say
this as a reasonable satisfied GNOME 3 user with family who are also
currently reasonably satisfied GNOME 3 users, who opted out of
updating to F15 to keep a G2 environment for another 6 months before
making the switch to G3.


If Arch is the best model for a rolling release, and a model we would
pattern a Fedora rolling release on, then I'd probably not be
participating in such a rolling process.  If other people value it and
can find the resources to set it up, I'll push packages into the
process and respond to bug reports as part of regular packaging work
to support regular releases, but I won't be using a rolling
day-to-day.

-jef