yum flavors vs/ fc1, fc2, fc3...infinity
Timothy Murphy
tim at birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
Fri Jul 16 14:38:12 UTC 2004
William Hooper wrote:
> You can't have it both ways. If you want newer packages fast you have to
> do fast releases. That is why Fedora does time-based releases, so that
> newer packages get integrated faster.
I don't really agree with this.
You are making a principle out of what was really an error of judgement.
FC-2 was not sufficiently well tested.
If in fact it is not possible to test FC-n properly in the time allotted.
the time between releases should be increased.
Personally I haven't found FC-2 too much trouble,
and I will stick to Fedora, and continue to upgrade
unless it becomes much more difficult.
I think Fedora could and should try to develop
as a replacement for RH-9 for as wide an audience as possible.
It's important in my view to keep a balance
between adding new features to Linux
and at the same time ensuring Linux is
as easy to install and use as possible.
I've said before, and will say again -
you would get many more testers, and therefore more reliable distributions,
if it were stated that test releases should in principle be upgrade-able.
I'm sure there must be many people like me
who would be willing to run test releases
but who don't have a spare machine to devote to this purpose,
or the time or inclination to re-install every 3 months.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail (<80k only): tim /at/ birdsnest.maths.tcd.ie
tel: +353-86-2336090, +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
More information about the users
mailing list