Update System: Not Rawhide

[Nigel Jones]

>>>>>> "JK" == Jeremy Katz <katzj at redhat.com> writes:
>
> JK> If rawhide diverged earlier, we'd see a substantial drop in the
> JK> number of testers and thus the number of things found late in the
> JK> game.
>
> I've seen that claim multiple times, but I'm not sure I've ever seen
> any evidence to back it up.  Even assuming that the claim is true,
> there's a need to balance those effects versus those of having the
> repo that's supposed to be stabilizing also be the one where all
> development has to happen.
>
>  - J<
Personally, my opinion is roughly when the first components are frozen,
devel is split, (i.e. F8/F9/whatever the next version ends up been),
people interested in using 'the next great version' can then choose to use
that repo, while those interested purely in keeping stuff up to date, do
not have to wait for the next release to nearly happen.

I think this can lead to an improved workflow (yes I realise it ends up
into 4 maintained branches at any one time, and if a maintainer finds
him/herself strapped for time to make changes in all 4 branches, then they
should feel free to add co-maintainers.

N.J.