On Tue, 2016-12-20 at 10:32 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
wrote:
You gave just one disadvantage of this proposal and no advantages at
all. Why do you think the above is a good idea? I, for one, do not
like
waiting a month to get bug fixes that are not security-related. We
are
not RHEL or Microsoft or Adobe. I'm convinced that having bug fixes
available as soon as they're ready is valuable (even if you choose to
wait before installing them). Also, as was pointed out elsewhere in
this
subthread, updates get tested only after they're released to stable
very
often, so it's also valuable to get the feedback earlier rather than
in
a month.
Batched updates are something I really want to do regardless. Of course
having fixes available sooner is valuable, but you have to weigh that
against the cost of releasing a *botched* update. The advantage of
batched updates is we reduce the risk of releasing botched updates. If
we batch the updates together and release them all at once, possibly
with new installation media, then that's something that we can QA, and
that reduces the risk of a botched update.
Last year we released several botched hawkey/hif updates (I lost count,
but I think it was three total?) that broke PackageKit updates, so
nontechnical users who don't know command line foo to recover their
systems got stuck forever, never to receive an update again. Ideally
that would never happen. Delaying updates by a couple of weeks seems
like a small price to reduce this risk.
Michael