[PHILOSOPHY] Stability and Release Schedules

[Mark Haney]

John Wendel wrote:
>
> Here's your chance to slap me up side of the head!
>
> Reading the Debian thread (and others) has made me wonder why Fedora 
> has to have "releases" at all. Why not have a continuously evolving 
> distribution? One would start by downloading an "installer system" 
> that would then use the existing mechanisms (yum, whatever) to update 
> itself. From this point on, why would one need "releases"? Just keep 
> releasing updates and new packages exactly as things are done now.
>
> I know there must be something wrong with this scenario; would someone 
> like to hit me with a clue stick.
>
> Regards,
>
> John
>
Personally, I like the Fedora system for servers and such since I know 
where things stand at a given time.  For instance I've upgraded 5 
servers over the last month with either FC4 or FC5.  I chose FC4 for the 
production ones since I was comfortable with it and knew it was stable.  
I used FC5 since it was newer on the 'not ready for prime time' boxes I 
have to work out the kinks. For workstations or laptops (mine in 
particular) I use Gentoo for the very reason you suggest 'a revolving 
distro'.  It's great to immediately get the latest and greatest off the 
bat if I have time to work out the bugs or deal with driver/module 
issues.  I don't want Fedora to change the way it releases for this 
reason alone.  I know where the distro is if I need to fall back on a 
certain library/package.

My $0.02.


-- 
Mark Haney
Sr. Systems Administrator	
ERC Broadband