On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Luis Garrido wrote:
> The main reason that I am writing is to ask you about your take
on our
> update strategy in Fedora. Currently, there is a heated discussion in
> Fedora-devel mailing list about update policies. It might happen that
> our updates policy might change to a more conservative one.
I thought Fedora filled RedHat's niche for "keeping up with the new
features even if stability suffers a bit" distributions. What is "more
conservative", exactly?
There are mixed opinions. Some say security and bugfixes but no
enhancement updates. Some even go up to pushing security fixes only.
Here is a proposal that will be discussed in tomorrow's steering
committee meeting:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-March/132730.html
No conclusion has been reached for the time being.
A mature-ish Fedora (i.e., one version below the the current one but
still on maintenance, between 6- and 12-months old) is usually a good
trade-off. You will always have to deal with some problematic stuff or
another, putting down small fires, but that's the blood in the
bleeding edge, people should be aware of that when they choose this
kind of distro. If you value rock-solid stability over new features go
RHEL or CentOS (which I do for my servers.)
:) These were the main arguments that some more "adventurous" package
maintainers like me came up with.
I just wanted to hear you folks' opinions, as that's what matters for me most.
Orcan