Rolling release model philosophy (was Re: Anaconda is totally trashing the F18 schedule (was Re: f18: how to install into a LVM partitions (or RAID)))

[Mathieu Bridon]

On Monday, November 05, 2012 06:56 PM, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
> mike cloaked píše v Ne 04. 11. 2012 v 21:44 +0000:
>> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Jiri Eischmann <jeischma at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>          This is a very valid argument. I understand this is a devel
>>          list, so we should stay on the technical level, but if we
>>          discuss such broad changes that affect the whole project, we
>>          should also take into account other aspects.
>>
>>          Switching to rolling release would have a *huge* negative
>>          impact on marketing! It's releases what makes the fuzz and
>>          their announcements get beyond our current user base. We would
>>          have no release parties, no codenames. We would lose the
>>          product. I wonder what impact it would have on Fedora adoption
>>          by cloud providers. I think it's much more understandable not
>>          only for them, but also for their customers to take Fedora 17
>>          than some monthly build.
>>
>>
>>
>> Does anyone have any reliable statistics about the number of users who
>> feel that release parties and codenames are important to them?
>
> Release parties and codenames were just examples. It's about the buzz
> around releases. You can check Google Trends where you find peaks in
> number of searches for Fedora after every release.

That just means our marketing is virtually inexistant between two releases.

A rolling release model would mean that our buzz would be lower than the 
peak values, but it would be constant.

Depending on how you look at it, it could be a net win.


-- 
Mathieu