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

Re: Updated Anaconda packages



On Monday, July 27 2009, Jeff Garzik said:
> Honestly, I always thought Fedora install images should be regenerated  
> far more frequently.
>
> I think back to my days as a Solaris sysadmin in the late 90's, where  
> ordering the latest "media kit" (CD-ROM) from Sun meant I got a fresh  
> installer, fresh kernel, and all recommended patches.

And Sun was doing those media kits roughly every six to twelve months
from what I remember.  And our (major) release frequency is every six 
months, so ...

> Even in the face of known Linux kernel bugs, people always seemed  
> reluctant to regenerate the Fedora install images.  I think Fedora would  
> better serve its users by being much more willing to update install  
> images after initial release.

Regenerating the images is expensive -- it requires effort on the part
of the developers doing fixes, release engineering doing builds with the
fixes, QA testing the fixes, infrastructure (mirrors) carrying a
significant amount more bits[1], ... 

When our releases are at most six months apart, how much effort are we
willing to divert from the next release to make this happen?  It's not
going to happen for free.

Jeremy

[1] What gets respun?  All the images (DVD, live, etc)?  Some of them?
If some, which ones?  How do we differentiate between them?


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