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

Re: What Fedora makes sucking for me - or why I am NOT Fedora

Kevin Kofler wrote:
Bradley Baetz wrote:
Can someone who wants the new versions immediately explain why they
don't want to wait an average of 3 months for the next fedora release?

Because if you need the bugfix or the new feature now, any wait is too long.

Why is waiting for a new feature for 3 months too long? Excluding support for new hardware, if you want a bleeding edge feature run rawhide.

Note that I'm *NOT* objecting to bugfixes, or new packages, or trying to force maintainers to backport individual fixes.

Also because you'll then also get those major changes which were
intentionally not pushed as updates to that release, e.g. KDE 4 for Fedora
9, kdepim 4, Amarok 2, digiKam 0.10 and Krusader 2 for Fedora 10, probably
KOffice 2 for Fedora 11.

So you want the latest and greatest new version, as long as its not too new?

And because if you don't want new versions, you can use CentOS or Debian
stable or Ubuntu or openSUSE or any other distribution which does not push
version updates to releases. Why take away Fedora's unique selling point?
If you don't like the way Fedora works, you should be using another
distribution, not trying to strong-arm Fedora into working the way you

There's a difference between pushing new versions that fix bugs, and pushing them the day after an upstream release to stable and rawhide simultaneously, with a comment of 'new version'.

I enable updates-testing on occasion, and test updates, and file bugs. But I do that knowing that stuff has a higher risk of breaking, and its my choice. Similarly, when I upgrade from F9 to F10 I expect something won't work right (whether or not that's a good thing is a different question that I don't want to get into).

I don't think its unreasonable for a user, once they've installed a distribution, to keep using it and its stable updates without wireless breaking (multiple times), printers to stop working, NM to stop working, or gphoto to stop talking to my camera.

None of those are hypothetical, BTW. And yes, I filed bugs, bisected upstream git trees, and supplied patches, but I shouldn't have to wonder what each stable push will break - if I wanted that I'd use rawhide. Yes, finding and fixing those bugs in F9 meant that the bug wasn't in F10, but to a user who just wants to Get Stuff Done and isn't going to upgrade to F10 on release day, thats not a positive.

My point is that every update may fix things, but it may also break things. There's a risk/reward tradeoff that is different for different packages and maybe there's a sample bias too (ie we only see the packages that go out when they break stuff, and never have several hundred post threads about packages that are held back for rawhide).


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