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

Re: kernel development approach for fedora




On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 17:19 -0400, Chris Snook wrote:
> Mail Lists wrote:
> > On 10/10/2008 03:49 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >> Mail Lists wrote:
> >>>   In this new mode we would have only  2 streams -  current development
> >>> and stable.
> > 
> >> There are a few distributions that do this - Gentoo, Arch etc. Each has
> >> it's advantages and disadvantages. One of the problems of rolling
> >> release model distributions in a mass scale is that, it is pretty
> >> difficult to stabilize even to a nominal level.
> >>
> >> Rahul
> >>
> > 
> >    While that is true, the argument goes that large periodic releases
> > has drawbacks too - and the kernel seems to be do pretty well with its
> > approach ... I still wonder whether the kernel way may work for fedora ..
> 
> The rolling release model works well for distributions that simply follow 
> upstream, but Fedora is often *ahead* of upstream on several features.  We need 
> to maintain a bit more stability with the baseline package so we can safely add 
> the innovative patches that aren't yet in Linus's kernel tree.
> 
> -- Chris
> 
For me, Fedora is a good compromise between a rolling release model and
the discrete releases model that some other distributions use. I do not
have to wait half a year before I can use a more recent version of
Banshee, Pidgin etc. than which was originally included at the time of
release. Besides, I prefer Fedora's use of bleeding edge software which
is nevertheless quite stable to the rolling releases of Gentoo and Arch.

Jeroen


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