Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 31 Is Already Planning Ahead For Python 3.8

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

  • Fedora 31 Is Already Planning Ahead For Python 3.8

    Phoronix: Fedora 31 Is Already Planning Ahead For Python 3.8

    While Fedora 30 isn't debuting for another three months, with the system-wide change deadline already having passed on that release, ambitious Fedora developers are already thinking about early feature plans for Fedora 31 that will debut in November...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...thon-3.8-Plans

  • #2
    Man, must be a slow news day in the Phoronix Office:
    BREAKING NEWS: A new version of a popular distro is going to be shipping the latest version of a popular scripting language.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by flubba86 View Post
      Man, must be a slow news day in the Phoronix Office:
      BREAKING NEWS: A new version of a popular distro is going to be shipping the latest version of a popular scripting language.
      Slow news day? The office has hit its goal of 10 articles per day already.

      But if you still think so, it may be because he might be running benchmarks on an important speed-up.

      Comment


      • #4
        Fedora using new software is hardly even close to being newsworthy.

        What is newsworthy will be Fedora being forced to use old software due to various reasons.

        Comment


        • #5
          I used fedora back at about version 19 or 20, and liked it. One of the best implementations of Gnome at the time. KDE on fedora was pretty terrible though, and Gnome was too limiting. Also, the 6 month upgrade cycle is extremely annoying. Wait for the new release to try new technology. Wait another month for the worst bugs to be resolved. By the time you install and have it fine tuned, your packages are falling behind the new releases again.

          Since then I've been on Parabola Arch, Tumbleweed with a libre kernel, and Trisquel. I'm either on the bleeding edge, or waiting for the Trisquel 3 or 4 year update cycle. Both of which are quite enjoyable in their own way. Better than being at the mercy of the completely arbitrary and useless 6 month upgrade cycle.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by andyprough View Post
            Better than being at the mercy of the completely arbitrary and useless 6 month upgrade cycle.
            As an almost exclusively Red Hat family user, I really don’t see the problem with the 6 month release cycle. If you’re using Fedora, you should already have an idea of what you’re going in for. For the version updates, the process is so seamless now it’s pretty much like running any other update. Contrast this to RHEL which has close to no support for running a major version upgrade. Kickstart and provision or sit through things manually.

            The past handful of releases have been pretty solid and stable. To me the more annoying thing about Fedora is the amount of updates it gets (particularly kernel ones); they’re constant. But coming from RHEL/CentOS which only get a handful of updates and kernel patches every so often, it feels more than other distros. I don’t know /shrug

            Cheers,
            Mike

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by mroche View Post
              As an almost exclusively Red Hat family user, I really don’t see the problem with the 6 month release cycle.
              Just that it's completely without any justification whatsoever in 2019. When I first started out with Linux about 20 years ago, I got a big box of RedHat floppy disks and with a bit of help and luck got a system up and running. After awhile, the regular 6 month or 1 year upgrades were useful, because you were buying or copying a bunch of disks or CDs from a friend or a store or getting them with a Linux magazine. Because of the fact you had to physically get copies of the disks, and because upgrading was hit or miss, it made sense to only do it once every 6 months or year. Developers of major packages would time their releases to try to get in the latest upgrade from RedHat and SuSE. But today, the 6 month mark is completely arbitrary, completely divorced from the upgrade schedule of major packages (except those controlled by RedHat, as we've discussed on Phoronix several times).

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by andyprough View Post

                Just that it's completely without any justification whatsoever in 2019. When I first started out with Linux about 20 years ago, I got a big box of RedHat floppy disks and with a bit of help and luck got a system up and running. After awhile, the regular 6 month or 1 year upgrades were useful, because you were buying or copying a bunch of disks or CDs from a friend or a store or getting them with a Linux magazine. Because of the fact you had to physically get copies of the disks, and because upgrading was hit or miss, it made sense to only do it once every 6 months or year. Developers of major packages would time their releases to try to get in the latest upgrade from RedHat and SuSE. But today, the 6 month mark is completely arbitrary, completely divorced from the upgrade schedule of major packages (except those controlled by RedHat, as we've discussed on Phoronix several times).
                Time has changed and distribution has to adapt.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by andyprough View Post
                  I used fedora back at about version 19 or 20, and liked it. One of the best implementations of Gnome at the time. KDE on fedora was pretty terrible though, and Gnome was too limiting. Also, the 6 month upgrade cycle is extremely annoying. Wait for the new release to try new technology. Wait another month for the worst bugs to be resolved. By the time you install and have it fine tuned, your packages are falling behind the new releases again.

                  Since then I've been on Parabola Arch, Tumbleweed with a libre kernel, and Trisquel. I'm either on the bleeding edge, or waiting for the Trisquel 3 or 4 year update cycle. Both of which are quite enjoyable in their own way. Better than being at the mercy of the completely arbitrary and useless 6 month upgrade cycle.
                  Nobody said that it was mandatory to upgrade.

                  I'm still on Fedora 23 with the updates repository disabled. Most of the original packages are still recent enough to function for daily computing. And I also maintain my own runtime layer of self-built applications and libraries newer than the original respository versions where needed.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It's been a three or four years since I ran Fedora on bare hardware. I found the GNOME experience flawless and the KDE experience buggy.

                    I switched away because my computer kept locking up, and I thought it was a Fedora problem I couldn't track down. Six months, two other Linux distribution installs, and a Windows install I figured out my video card had hardware problems causing random system freezes. I was able to reproduce the problem moving the card between computers. I replaced the card, and everything was fine - but at that point I was using Ubuntu again and didn't feel like doing another install back to Fedora.

                    Originally posted by Sonadow View Post

                    Nobody said that it was mandatory to upgrade.

                    I'm still on Fedora 23 with the updates repository disabled. Most of the original packages are still recent enough to function for daily computing. And I also maintain my own runtime layer of self-built applications and libraries newer than the original respository versions where needed.
                    Isn't that a pretty high security risk?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X