is fedora really bleeding edge?

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 13:34:25 -0700
Stuart McGraw <smcg4191 at frii.com> wrote:

> One of the reason for using Fedora is quick access
> to the latest software -- sometimes even too quick
> (hence the "bleeding edge" moniker.)
> 
> But I have noticed this is not true for some things.
> For example, in Fedora 15 python seems frozen at 
> python-2.7.1 even though -2.7.2 was released a long 
> time ago and fixes a number of bugs.
> 
> Another example is postgresql which remains in the 
> 9.0.x release although 9.1.x contains a number of
> significant new features.
> 
> Why do many packages follow the upstream faithfully
> yet others seem to use a boat-anchor update policy?  
> Is there an official policy about this or is it a 
> matter of individual packagers' choice?

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy

Python is very base to Fedora, so the maintainer may have decided it
wasn't worth the update. Or it may have introduced some incompatibility
which made it unsuitable for a stable release. 

In the case of postgres, version updates like that require a database
dump and reload, which can't be done in an automated way. Updates like
that are only suitable for between Fedora releases when the user is
ready to reload data like that. 

kevin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120304/383b8e47/attachment.sig>