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