RHEL is just a frozen reflection in time of Fedora so anything that works
on RHEL is irrelevant to Fedora.
I rather meant it as "if it is enough to run in professional set-ups, it is
probably well programmed and stable".
Fedora reflects the opensource environment at a given point in time
and
that environment changes it's shape roughly every 6 month or so so, so by
the time a component hits RHEL it's already outdated and could have been
replaced with something else in Fedora.
I know the release cycle of Fedora. However, this is only one way to see
it. When the component hits RHEL, it can well be a matured and stable
thing, not outdated. And I do not see a reason why we could not profit from
such stability in Fedora, too.
Fedora users expect to get the latest greatest Gnome desktop
environment
with all the bells and whistle it's creators envision which is something
that you cant deliver in RHEL right.
This is just an unfair generalization. Fedora users are not exclusively
Gnome users. There are lots of them who use a different spin, or a
different DE. Your statement would be incorrect, even if you said "Fedora
Workstation users", so let me correct you to
"Gnome users expect to get the latest greatest ...". Then let me ask you
... Is timesyncd a Gnome thing? Or a systemd thing? And if the latter, why
should Gnome users care?
Take wpa_supplicant for example it works fine for RHEL right but
it's
about to be replaced with IWD in distributions and I would say now would be
the time to look into that and have it in place for F34 which will benefit
both IoT and the Desktop environments. X worked fine for RHEL yet we have
replaced it, SysV init worked fine for RHEL yet we replaced it and the list
goes on as things continuesly evolve.
So why do people keep falling back to "outdated" yet stable solutions
quite
often? X being a superb example.
Surely you have noticed that when you go to a devconf there in BRNO
it's
like going to a museum and your like hey we used to do that in Fedora
couple releases back how cute they are still working on it and this is
going to be hell for them to maintain for 10 years or whatever the lifetime
of RHEL is these days.
Now, I totally do not understand what the DevConf content has to do with
this topic. It seems like you don't like it. That's fine. There a lots of
people who do.
Well timesyncd would be a good example, resolved another both
components
that should be relative harmless to restart thus not affect other test
running in parallel on the same image.
How long is this going to stay before anybody suggests another such change?
JBG
_______________________________________________
desktop mailing list -- desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/desktop@lists.fedoraproject...
--
Lukáš Růžička
FEDORA QE, RHCE
Red Hat
<
https://www.redhat.com>
Purkyňova 115
612 45 Brno - Královo Pole
lruzicka(a)redhat.com
TRIED AND PERSONALLY TESTED, ERGO TRUSTED. <
https://redhat.com/trusted>