The updates firehose

Christopher Aillon caillon at
Sun Jun 10 15:08:35 UTC 2007

Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 09, 2007 at 04:05:00PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> Anybody else think we're issuing entirely /way/ too many updates?  We've had 
>> 138 "stable" updates, and 177 current "testing" updates.  If all those were 
>> to go stable, we're talking over 300 updates, in just over a week.
> But is that different than at FC6 release time (I don't know, but I
> assume it was similar if not even more)? We're not really doing
> anything different that made updates increase, I would even think that
> it is more difficult to pass updates since they have to be pushed
> through bodhi.
> You only feel like there are that many updates, because they are now
> all using bodhi while before F7 only 1/4th (Core) would become visible
> that way.
>> Seriously.  We're drowning our users in updates.  Are all of them
>> really necessary?  I feel like we've got this culture of update
>> whatever/whenever coming from Extras where it was just fire and
>> forget.  While that might be fun for the maintainer, is it fun for
>> the user?  Is it fun for the user with a slow connection?
> I think Fedora's success is partly due to being updated that way.

I think the ugpradeability is a factor, but I think you've got it wrong. 
  If every time someone built a change into rawhide, they also pushed a 
fix to F-7 for example because there's a new version of <insert popular 
app here>, then what's the point in upgrading to F-8 when that's ready?

Most extras packages have the same version across the board.  I 
understand the pros of doing that, but do we really want to turn each 
Fedora release into the next RHL 7.3?

More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list