Proposal: Rolling Release

[Les Mikesell]

Michael Schwendt wrote:
> 
>> All I can say is that with Ubuntu you can pick vendor drivers and Sun 
>> Java 1.5 from the software management tool and you almost never have to 
>> worry about conflicts among packages from the different repositories. 
> 
> "Almost never"? How many external repositories have you tried?

That's the real difference.  Ubuntu does not have the same exclusionary 
policy so you don't have to track down packages from a million 
uncoordinated places.

 > Dependency
> problems and inter-repository issues are not specific to Fedora or RPM.
> Experimental upgrades/replacements/alternatives, orphans, and poorly
> maintained packages do exist for other dists, too, not just in 3rd
> party repos.

Of course that can happen - Fedora just makes it impossible not to happen.

> Just talk to open-minded (!) Debian/Ubuntu followers.

I just have my own experience - on my laptop Ubuntu installs the right 
video and wireless driver and lets me pick Sun java from the GUI 
software tool.  Fedora doesn't.

> And what has this to do with your earlier claim anyway? (the "horribly
> fractured 3rd party situation")

Again - that's just my experience.  When I've installed fedora, I've had 
to track down the components myself and had them break regularly during 
updates.

>>> There simply is not enough man-power
>>> to spend additional time on coordinating between 3rd party packagers.
>> That's something that potential users have to take into account when 
>> choosing the distro they are going run.
> 
> "Potential users" don't and can't know about such things. It's nothing
> that plays a role in dist advertising yet. 3rd party repos are
> _independent_.

You are seriously underestimating users if you don't think they are 
capable of trying a few distros and tossing the ones that break.  Fedora 
forces the replacement issue regularly anyway with its fast expiration 
cycle.

>> Which make the effort that Ubuntu (with the help of the underlying 
>> debian packages) makes particularly outstanding. 
> 
> Is a distribution war your only interest? I don't share your view.
> So, no comment on packaging quality or repo quality here.

No, it is actually a fairly complicated issue.  Fedora serves a purpose, 
but I think it would be even better served if it were more usable on 
several fronts.  One is the upgrade cycle per the start of this thread, 
but equally critical is the effect of the changes on other software the 
user needs to run and whether or not the user trusts the distro enough 
to actually run things that will test it well.

> "the help of the underlying debian packages" is a funny phrase, btw.

How so?  Would the accomplishments of Ubuntu be possible if they 
isolated themselves from other's work instead of using it to best 
advantage?  What's funny to me is that packagers work to maintain 
incompatible systems and keep changing them yet say there is a lack of 
time to keep all their incompatible repository versions coordinated.

>> The point of using any 
>> distribution instead of rolling your own linux from scratch is that 
>> others theoretically have worked together to make sure that everything 
>> is compatible.
> 
> And the context of this sentence is what?

Simply that users will choose the distro that works. If you want to keep 
rolling out new stuff and have someone test it, it has to at least 
mostly work together most of the time.

>> If a distro doesn't arrange for this kind of cooperation 
>> it can't provide what users need and expect.
> 
> Apples and oranges. A discussion thread on this level only scratches
> the surface. It won't be fruitful at all. Not enough substance.

Agreed, but dismissing the ways Ubuntu provides a better user experience 
isn't all that useful either.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com