F11 Proposal: Stabilization

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 17.11.2008 23:16, Jon Masters wrote:
 >
> Various other communities (and distributions) have made a
> point out of "stable" releases where the "big ticket" feature is
> stabilization, so I think it would be a win to consider that.

I disagree: It seems to me a lot of the current Fedora users like the 
"latest bells and whistles" style (like you called it in the mail that 
started this discussion) I for one really like the steady stream of 
kernel-updates, as that greatly improves hardware support over time! On 
OpenSuse or Ubuntu you are often forced to run the development branches 
when you need newer driver (just like it was in the early Fedora days 
and in the RHL days).

Those users otoh that don't like the steady updates stream are likely 
using other distributions already, as Fedora is doing it for quite a 
while already.

So I fear that a lot of our current users will be unhappy if Fedora gets 
closer to a updates style like those from opensuse or ubuntu. And at the 
same time we likely don't attract that many new people, as most of the 
opensuse and ubuntu users are likely glad with the distribution they use 
right now. Further: we have a fame for shipping "the latest bells and 
whistles". I suppose getting rid of that would take years...

Quoting from the mail that started this discussion:

> I would personally much
> prefer that stuff that used to work didn't break randomly, and that
> stable Fedora updates wouldn't result in me wondering whether suspend,
> graphics, SELinux, or some other feature that was working was going to
> break today. This isn't actually a rant, more pointing out a necessity.

Agreed, but I tend to say we should work towards a solution where we can 
ship the "latest bells and whistles" and nevertheless provide stability.

I for one think we need something like that:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2008-August/msg00025.html

The relevant part:

"""
I more and more think that we should consider to switch to a more 
rolling release scheme with different usage levels. Roughly something 
like the following maybe:


Level 1 -- rawhide, similar to how it is today (a bit more stable and 
less breakage would be nice, but that's in the works already)

Level 2pre -- things that got tested in rawhide, that are still young, 
but known to work well in rawhide; similar to what updates-testing for 
F9 is today;

Level 2 -- things that worked fine for some time in 2pre; similar to 
what F9 is today

Level 3pre -- things that worked fine for some time in 2

Level 3 -- things that worked fine for some time in 2pre


Level 3pre and 3 are like F8-updates-testing and F8, but with the 
difference that everything has to be tested and shipped in level 2 (aka 
F9) first.
"""

CU
knurd