KDE 4.9 F16?

[Karel Volný]

Dne Po 20. srpna 2012 17:08:30, mike cloaked napsal(a):
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Karel Volný 
<kvolny at redhat.com> wrote:
> > yes, it's a shame that someone is unwilling to upgrade to F17
> > :-)
> > 
> > K.
> 
> That is a pretty snotty remark

have you noticed those three characters ":-)" just after the 
sentence?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emoticon#Creation_of_:-.29_and_:-.28

> and very unwarranted.

not that much ... see below:

> F16 is a currently supported version of Fedora until about
> November.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Philosophy

Releases of the Fedora distribution are like releases of the 
individual packages that compose it. A major version number 
reflects a more-or-less stable set of features and functionality. 
As a result, we should avoid major updates of packages within a 
stable release. Updates should aim to fix bugs, and not introduce 
features, particularly when those features would materially 
affect the user or developer experience. The update rate for any 
given release should drop off over time, approaching zero near 
release end-of-life; since updates are primarily bugfixes, fewer 
and fewer should be needed over time. 
This necessarily means that stable releases will not closely 
track the very latest upstream code for all packages. We have 
rawhide for that.

> If you are the owner of a single machine then a re-install is
> tedious but not too time-consuming every 6 months. If you are
> the admin for a dozen machines or more then re-installing all
> of them every 6 months is a pretty tedious business - and like
> quite a few other people I re-install usually annually on the
> majority of Fedora machines for that reason.

1) I've never needed to do a reinstall of Fedora machine - the 
yum path has worked for me always, with one exception being the 
usrmove which I had to fix manually ... YMMV

2) I believe there are some management tools for those who have 
12 or more machines that make upgrading them all as easy as 
upgrading one of them

3) I really doubt if your work reinstalling the machines 
justifies calling a shame the fact that the developers don't do 
their additional work in upgrading the released distros (in fact, 
I doubt this update should go even to F17(*)) and pushing the 
change also on other people who think that having to cope with a 
new version of software on their machine is a pretty tedious 
business

(*) also considering the fact the developers provide the kde-
testing/-unstable repos

> For quite a lot of other people a rolling release distribution
> makes less work when maintaining a significant number of
> machines - and indeed I am moving my machines progressively
> over to a rolling release distribution for that reason. I now
> get to be more up to date than current Fedora on those
> machines running the rolling release distribution. So even if
> I was running F17 I would not be as up to date as Archlinux
> for this particular package set.

good for you - but then I really don't understand why would you 
like Fedora to be just like Arch when you can (and do) install 
Arch itself?

yep, I'm sad to see people leaving Fedora, but then the question 
is what to do better to motivate the people to stay - but if it 
is such feature then I doubt if we should change ... where would 
be the freedom then if all the distros would use the rolling 
updates model, where would go those who dislike Arch?

> We all have choices - and I asked a simple and perfectly valid
> question - your kind of reply can lead to bad feeling on a list
> like this!

hm, I though I replied to

"shame about F16 though!"

... I don't see any indication that *this* is "a simple and 
perfectly valid question"

but I'm no native English speaker so I may have gotten things 
wrong

K.

-- 
Karel Volný
QE BaseOs/Daemons Team
Red Hat Czech, Brno
tel. +420 532294274
(RH: +420 532294111 ext. 8262074)
xmpp kavol at jabber.cz
:: "Never attribute to malice what can
::  easily be explained by stupidity."
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/attachments/20120820/ac53b482/attachment.sig>