-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 07/09/2014 03:07 PM, Mike Pinkerton wrote:
On 7 Jul 2014, at 11:17, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Stephen Gallagher
> <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 07/06/2014 03:43 AM, William wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2014-07-03 at 10:05 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That's misleading. Fedora hasn't been releasing
>>>> "do-it-yourself" releases. Our previous install images
>>>> were composed and tested by QA, including testing fedup
>>>> upgrades from the previous release. With Fedora.next, we
>>>> don't have an install image that is an equivalent of <=
>>>> F20.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps I have missed them, but I've seen no discussion or
>>>> plans around testing upgrades to F21 from F20. Unless the
>>>> Products intend to test upgrading from F20, and/or QA
>>>> intends to somehow test fedup from F20 to F21 in a
>>>> non-product manner, we're essentially changing the
>>>> semantics of upgrades. I agree it should still work, but
>>>> saying it's a continuation of existing practice when it
>>>> isn't is wrong.
>>>>
>>>> josh
>>>
>>>
>>> It's also misleading given how much focus has been given to
>>> the three new products that will be released: So why now is
>>> there a "non-productised" version? That's not been advertised
>>> much.
>>>
>>
>> I honestly don't know how much more we could have advertised
>> that. We've been talking about it since the beginning.
>> Particularly about how the Fedora Products are additive to the
>> classic Fedora and that spins aren't going away (they're
>> non-productized versions too).
>
> You're talking about additive in the "they all use the same
> repos" sense, but there is no planned install media that will be
> produced similar to the F20 release. There are the 3 products,
> and there are the spins. The product closest to the existing
> Fedora default is Workstation, and we're targeting a live media
> as the primary deliverable. There have been 0 plans or
> discussions around fedup/upgrades from F20 so far.
While I appreciate that the Fedora project has goals that it wants
to achieve with the three new "products", I had assumed based on
the explanations that I have read that:
1. There will not be any change in the repo structure -- no
separate repos for separate "products".
This is true.
2. For those of us who are not interested in the new
"products" or
do not find their minimum package assurances to be important in our
use cases, there will still be a traditional "non-productized"
Fedora.
This is nuanced. Fedora as a non-Productized repository will exist.
See below.
3. There will still be plain "non-productized" versions of
/etc/os-release (or wherever the systemd guys are relocating it)
and /etc/fedora-release.
This is true.
4. There would be, at least, a net install CD to install a
traditional "non-productized" Fedora system.
This is not strictly true. The *official* install media will be for
one of the Products. There will also be install media and/or live
images for the Spins. These Spins will essentially be installing
specific package sets from non-productized Fedora.
I do not know which or if any Spins will be providing the specific net
install CD you're asking about. This will not be an *official* (read:
tested by QA) method of installing Fedora. However, I see no reason
why it wouldn't work.
5. A fedup upgrade will be possible from a traditional
"non-productized" Fedora 20 system to a traditional
"non-productized" Fedora 21 system and, in due time, from
traditional "non-productized" Fedora 21 to 22, etc.
This statement is true for F20->F21. For F21->F22, I want it to be
possible to go from "non-productized" to "productized" *if the user
wishes* (opt-in, not opt-out).
Am I mistaken on any or all of this?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -
http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlO9qS8ACgkQeiVVYja6o6Oa3ACbBm+zSBn3I2WLRhjU35d16644
emEAnjSHRMoSOX3aGXrobm+uxzYbSfaG
=e1DI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----