[Fedora-marketing-list] Interesting Article
Gian Paolo Mureddu
gmureddu at prodigy.net.mx
Mon Aug 21 17:38:44 UTC 2006
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Gian Paolo Mureddu wrote: . Having security
>> updates and bugfixes is good, and OK, but without the benefits
>> from newer versions of the programs, you are pretty much "forced"
>> to upgrade to a new version pretty much as soon as your current
>> distro is moved to Legacy. I'm not asking for this to change,
>> after all I knew that this was going to be the case with Fedora,
>> as it IS part of what makes Fedora, Fedora. But I wanted to point
>> out that in the case of Ubuntu, for its users the greater
>> lifespan is good, as they have upgrades, updates and bugfixes
>> heavily worked on for 18 months, before a distro upgrade.
> In Fedora the updates during a release tend to be much more closer
> to upstream than other distributions. For example, Ubuntu does not
> update to upstream kernels post-release unlike Fedora (which has
> its pros and cons). So you will have to clarify what you mean by
> the above.
My point being that as soon as any version of Fedora is moved to
Legacy, the updates seem to stall, and only bugfixes and security
updates are made for those distros, i.e no more updated packages (like
the case of OOo 2.0 for Core 3, even when it was still "current" when
Stentz had OOo 2 and Heidelberg stalled at 1.1.3), I didn't think OOo
was a core component. Certainly that's why a newer version is made
available. However as soon as a new version is released, and before
the "current" one is moved to Legacy, many updates stall and only
security fixes and bug fixes are issued, at least for packages in
Core, while Extras still undergo heavy updating.
I know a lot of distributions don't keep in sync with the upstream
packages, if any, I'd guess only Fedora and Gentoo do that anymore.
For Ubuntu, I guess is more like it was with the old Red Hat, not
being as current but heavily worked on.
> In the case of Fedora this is at most for 12 months
>> before moving into Legacy; and even then, some times even when
>> the next version is released the prior automatically stops
>> getting new versions of programs and is stalled. Not that this is
>> 100% true, but it is for quite a bit of packages (glibc, gcc,
>> etc, etc), but at least in the case of GCC this can induce
>> serious problems.
> Any major upgrade include core components has potential to
> introduce problems, yes.
Which is why newer versions of the distro as a whole are made
available every ~6 months... maybe only thing missing is yum
upgradeablity through from version to version, but that's been
previously discussed, and while feasible, it would also mean a lot of
left overs,which could or not get in the way of operation.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the marketing