[PHILOSOPHY] Stability and Release Schedules
Mark Haney
mhaney at ercbroadband.org
Thu Apr 27 22:58:19 UTC 2006
John Wendel wrote:
>
> Here's your chance to slap me up side of the head!
>
> Reading the Debian thread (and others) has made me wonder why Fedora
> has to have "releases" at all. Why not have a continuously evolving
> distribution? One would start by downloading an "installer system"
> that would then use the existing mechanisms (yum, whatever) to update
> itself. From this point on, why would one need "releases"? Just keep
> releasing updates and new packages exactly as things are done now.
>
> I know there must be something wrong with this scenario; would someone
> like to hit me with a clue stick.
>
> Regards,
>
> John
>
Personally, I like the Fedora system for servers and such since I know
where things stand at a given time. For instance I've upgraded 5
servers over the last month with either FC4 or FC5. I chose FC4 for the
production ones since I was comfortable with it and knew it was stable.
I used FC5 since it was newer on the 'not ready for prime time' boxes I
have to work out the kinks. For workstations or laptops (mine in
particular) I use Gentoo for the very reason you suggest 'a revolving
distro'. It's great to immediately get the latest and greatest off the
bat if I have time to work out the bugs or deal with driver/module
issues. I don't want Fedora to change the way it releases for this
reason alone. I know where the distro is if I need to fall back on a
certain library/package.
My $0.02.
--
Mark Haney
Sr. Systems Administrator
ERC Broadband
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list