[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: The updates firehose



Pete Chown <1 234 cx> wrote:

[...]

> The perfect solution, IMHO, would be two separate update streams.  There 
> would be a "recommended updates" stream for security patches and fixes 
> for major bugs.  Then there would be an "optional updates" stream for 
> minor bugs, new upstream versions, that sort of thing.  Then I could 
> install all the recommended updates, but I could leave the optional 
> updates unless I particularly needed the improved functionality.

The resulting divergence will lead to *two* Fedoras, the "stable branch"
and the "aggressive updates branch". Most users will stay on the first one,
and complain that they don't get all the shiny, new toys that are in the
second one; most developers will track the second branch and let the first
one fall into disrepair. Been there, done that (look for the extensive
discussion and rationale for the "new kernel development model" if you want
to see this in action and the grief it gives). And allowing people to mix
and match gives an even worse quagmire of "Fedora X, with just /this/ mix
of stable/agressive".

Better (try to) make sure that procedures in place give no problems when
updating. We clearly aren't there yet.
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                    Fono: +56 32 2654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria             +56 32 2654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile               Fax:  +56 32 2797513


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]