Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Future Of Fedora Gets Debated, Again

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Elv13 View Post
    Yesterday, I did install F18-rc1(pre), oh god, that installer is in terrible shape... I was on IRC too to report things and I managed to count 17 ways of failing to install Fedora (anaconda crash) on like 25 attempts (installed on 3 computers and failed some times in the same traps). Really, I hope they revert the installer to F17 and give it another 6 month. Pushing on some things, like the installer before it's ready is really, really bad.
    Reverting is impossible at this point, I brought that up with AdamW during one of the "Fedora Delayed again" threads. The installer affects too many other packages to just be switched out at random (probably bad design on the devs part since that doesnt seem too Modular but maybe thats just me). The installer is here to stay for better or worse for F18 and up.

    Though yes, it can be fixed in a few ways. Its honestly a little confusing at first.

    Comment


    • #17
      There are a gazilion Linux distro's...

      I like Fedora because;
      1. They deliver work upstream, meaning I get vanilla, and also;
      2. I get the latest shit;
      3. Others do the hard work for me (I just download the iso);
      4. I just want a solid UNIX system to program on, which makes Fedora a great chooice, since they have their hands on gcc;
      5. Next to a nice KDE 'spin', which just works (yes), I am now a fan of Gnome 3, since it now does one thing and one thing well, and it now respects my work-'flow'. (I became a fan[boy])

      If you want LTS; go Mint. If you want a big community; get Ubuntu.

      What is the damn problem? Fedora is bleeding edge, stable, fast, vanilla and has a large enough community. (for me)

      If you don't want that? Well then you don't want Fedora. Is that so hard to comprehend?

      People have opinions. If they are conflicting, then making personal threats isn't going to help much. If you want to go that way; you're not going to get your way. Simple.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by tancrackers View Post
        Are you seriously that bigoted that you don't consider certain distros Linux because they're easy to use? So, according to your logic, I should shun all Ubuntu and Mint users because I use Arch?
        What an idiotic thing to say!
        I think you've misunderstood Pallidus - my interpretation of his words was that average users don't use "Linux", they use whatever their distro of choice happens to be called. It's not a slur against individual distros, it's a recognition that such users don't care about the collective "Linux", only about whatever they happen to run.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by tancrackers View Post
          Now, I think Fedora should either go with true rolling (like arch and gentoo), semi-rolling (Slackware), or just stick with their 6-month cycle. Fedora is used more as a test bed for RHEL. Having an annual+ release would defeat this purpose. That's why I think semi-rolling would make the most sense. RHEL has an actual version from which to freeze source code and whatnot, plus you don't have to worry about a hard release cycle.
          Research and development, in general, usualy work towards a goal of producing functionality in stages. Why is the current Fedora approach of "When it's done" so bad in this regard? Development itself is 'rolling' upstream, all the time.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Elv13 View Post
            Yesterday, I did install F18-rc1(pre), oh god, that installer is in terrible shape... I was on IRC too to report things and I managed to count 17 ways of failing to install Fedora (anaconda crash) on like 25 attempts (installed on 3 computers and failed some times in the same traps). Really, I hope they revert the installer to F17 and give it another 6 month. Pushing on some things, like the installer before it's ready is really, really bad.
            There is no RC1. The current build is TC1. Which is much earlier.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Ericg View Post
              Reverting is impossible at this point, I brought that up with AdamW during one of the "Fedora Delayed again" threads. The installer affects too many other packages to just be switched out at random (probably bad design on the devs part since that doesnt seem too Modular but maybe thats just me). The installer is here to stay for better or worse for F18 and up.

              Though yes, it can be fixed in a few ways. Its honestly a little confusing at first.
              Well, no, it's exactly because it _is_ modular that you can't just switch it out. If you want to be able to just switch things out they have to be free-standing. anaconda uses various other bits of the distro, because then we don't have to write things twice. But as a consequence, you can't just throw in an old anaconda build and expect it to work at all.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
                Research and development, in general, usualy work towards a goal of producing functionality in stages. Why is the current Fedora approach of "When it's done" so bad in this regard? Development itself is 'rolling' upstream, all the time.
                There's nothing wrong with it. It's just that the cycle has come up as a debate. I'm just saying I think a semi-rolling release would probably be a good solution. But if there's nothing wrong with Fedora's current cycle, then by all means they should keep it!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by tancrackers View Post
                  There's nothing wrong with it. It's just that the cycle has come up as a debate. I'm just saying I think a semi-rolling release would probably be a good solution. But if there's nothing wrong with Fedora's current cycle, then by all means they should keep it!
                  I prefer to think of it more as 'there's something wrong with every possible release cycle' - which is why this debate always goes around in circles and never gets anywhere. There are several things 'wrong' with the current Fedora cycle, but then there are several things 'wrong' with any conceivable replacement as well.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by AdamW View Post
                    I prefer to think of it more as 'there's something wrong with every possible release cycle' - which is why this debate always goes around in circles and never gets anywhere. There are several things 'wrong' with the current Fedora cycle, but then there are several things 'wrong' with any conceivable replacement as well.
                    What can you say about Chakra Linux development model? It's the closest to "perfect", imho.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by ArtKun View Post
                      What can you say about Chakra Linux development model? It's the closest to "perfect", imho.
                      I'm not familiar with it, but if I find time, I'll take a look. Thanks for the pointer.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by garegin View Post
                        i've got a solution to the http://tmrepository.com/trademarks/b...ceddeathmarch/.
                        it's called bundles and chakra uses it. why can't all the other mainstream distros.
                        Colin Walters has been working on something similar called OSTree. IIRC he used some ideas from chakra along with a number of other systems that do similar things.
                        I know he's got it working to some extent (that is he has the multiple roots that allow for rollback) but i dont recall where he is with regards to the overall features he is wants.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by AdamW View Post
                          I'm not familiar with it, but if I find time, I'll take a look. Thanks for the pointer.
                          It is the same as Fedora, only the base system gets freezes, and apps on top of the frozen base are rolling.

                          Seems good to me, but then again, why not just fix it with an extra repository?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            tancracker I ment to write "your average newbie user is not using fedora... he is using mint/ubuntu"


                            a fedora LTS release would only make sense if fedora was more widely adopted and more newbie friendly.

                            enterprise and professional users will go for rhel centos debian, whatevers...

                            And I suppose the hardcore will go for arch gentoo whatevers...


                            that's what so interesting about fedora, it is clearly the superior linux distro but it doesn't quite know that

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
                              It is the same as Fedora, only the base system gets freezes, and apps on top of the frozen base are rolling.

                              Seems good to me, but then again, why not just fix it with an extra repository?
                              Like *BSD ports?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by V!NCENT View Post
                                It is the same as Fedora, only the base system gets freezes, and apps on top of the frozen base are rolling.

                                Seems good to me, but then again, why not just fix it with an extra repository?
                                The difference is that they update base system once a ~3 month, so the upgrades go smoother and more transparent to users than in Fedora.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X