Fedora 31 Will Likely Be Cancelled Or Significantly Delayed To Focus On Retooling

[torsionbar28]

with CentOS/RHEL together it doesnt make much cents to have it that way IMO. plus Fedora an CentOS merging would be cheaper for IBM/Redhat , Redhat/IBM would rake in the benefits if someone or a company wanted to use RHEL an get that support along with it, it would remove people from downloading a cheaper version of RHEL thats only supported via the CentOS forum

RHEL is for enterprise customers who require long term support and ABI stability. Desktop users don't necessarily care about long term support or ABI stability, they want the latest features and latest hardware support. The current model suits this perfectly.

How would you "merge" these, while still delivering long term support and ABI stability to enterprise, and latest code and features to consumers? What you are proposing is not possible.

[buzzrobot]

Fedora's current 6-month cycle is in synch with Gnome's 6-month release cycle. If Fedora opts for a 12-month cycle, they'd be testing and releasing a new Gnome release at the 6-month mark *or* skipping releases, assuming the distribution remains committed to packaging the latest Gnome release.

Fedora's support of two releases simultaneously gets little attention but it surely must increase support demands on the project.

Re: Fedora desktop use -- I find Fedora fine for my desktop use but only after running a homebrew script to add RpmFusion, a batch of packages, and roll out some tweaks. i can understand, though, that a user, especially a neophyte user, coming from Mint or Ubuntu or Windows, should not need to jump through homebrew post-install steps to get Fedora ready as a desktop system.

There is also the Nvidia issue. As long as Nvidia's driver and the kernel are developed out of sync and essentially independently of each other, *and* Fedora continues its practice of dropping frequent kernel updates during the lifetime of a releases, a heightened risk will exist that machines will reboot to black screens after the driver or the kernel is updated.

Frankly, making Fedora a no-sweat desktop and also maintaining its purpose as something of a new tech test platform are probably at odds with each other. If project resources were available, perhaps the best approach would be to create an officially supported "desktop spin".

(Something would need to be done about Anaconda for that desktop spin. It's quite capable, doesn't merit the grief it gets. but it does assume people know what a partition is and how they want to configure their storage. That's not realistic for desktop users. (And the closest Anaconda gets to a "do everything for you" approach uses LVM, which will thoroughly annoy many if/when they need to remove those partitions and find that doing so with typical GUI tools is a very large pain.)

[Spooktra]

I'm all in favor of them shipping every release going forward, in other words just discontinuing Fedora altogether. It sucks, DNF breaks easily, Anaconda is a joke of an installer, whoever invented dragora should be dragged through the mud, Fedora reminds me of Win 2k in some ways, a bare bones OS but nowhere near as good as Win 2k.

The funny thing is many people claim to use it as their primary desktop yet every single hardware review I see done using Linux it's always with Ubuntu.

Basically every other distro should cease to exist and should join Canonical in developing Ubuntu.

[gilboa]

I'm all in favor of them shipping every release going forward, in other words just discontinuing Fedora altogether. It sucks, DNF breaks easily, Anaconda is a joke of an installer, whoever invented dragora should be dragged through the mud, Fedora reminds me of Win 2k in some ways, a bare bones OS but nowhere near as good as Win 2k.

The funny thing is many people claim to use it as their primary desktop yet every single hardware review I see done using Linux it's always with Ubuntu.

Basically every other distro should cease to exist and should join Canonical in developing Ubuntu.

Just wondering.
I've got well above 50 machines running Fedora (and I lost count how many VMs), and my IT manager barely spends ~10% of his time on Linux management.
Hardware wise, our deployment ranges from low-end ChromeOS converted laptops to 4-socket servers with 1TB and 2TB RAM and above-PB storage.
Care to share your usage numbers?

Just in-case you think I'm making things up (Taken from my "private" development server):
$ uname -a
Linux (deleted) 4.18.19-100.fc27.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Nov 14 22:04:34 UTC 2018 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
$ cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep proc | wc -l
144
$ declare -i DISK_SPACE=0; declare -i SPACE=0; for SPACE in $(df -BG | /bin/awk '{ print $2}' | /bin/grep -v blocks | /bin/cut -d"G" -f1) ; do DISK_SPACE+=$SPACE ; done ; echo "Total disk space: $DISK_SPACE GB."
Total disk space: 1839228 GB.
$ free -g | grep Mem
Mem: 1007 4 644 32 358 921

(And BTW, we ported our proprietary software to Ubuntu, both 16.04 and 18.04, and we're having far more issues maintaining and deploying Ubuntu machines compared to Fedora machines).

- Gilboa

[Stefem]

Fedora's current 6-month cycle is in synch with Gnome's 6-month release cycle. If Fedora opts for a 12-month cycle, they'd be testing and releasing a new Gnome release at the 6-month mark *or* skipping releases, assuming the distribution remains committed to packaging the latest Gnome release.

Fedora's support of two releases simultaneously gets little attention but it surely must increase support demands on the project.

Re: Fedora desktop use -- I find Fedora fine for my desktop use but only after running a homebrew script to add RpmFusion, a batch of packages, and roll out some tweaks. i can understand, though, that a user, especially a neophyte user, coming from Mint or Ubuntu or Windows, should not need to jump through homebrew post-install steps to get Fedora ready as a desktop system.

There is also the Nvidia issue. As long as Nvidia's driver and the kernel are developed out of sync and essentially independently of each other, *and* Fedora continues its practice of dropping frequent kernel updates during the lifetime of a releases, a heightened risk will exist that machines will reboot to black screens after the driver or the kernel is updated.

The NVIDIA issue you mentioned is actually a non issue, since the NVIDIA driver module support DKMS by years now it will be automatically rebuilt when a new kernel is installed (as long as DKMS is present in the system).
Fedora had been my first experience with Linux (well, the first was another distro based on Fedora core) and I didn't find hard or user unfriendly although disabling nouveau could be a pain for inexperienced users (ironically much of the complain you read on the web is for lack of active contribution to nouveau by NVIDIA).
Personally I think Fedora was much better in the past, sometimes it seems to make change for no apparent reason or to switch to not yet ready stuff, the switch to gnome 3 had been somehow traumatic for me, it slowed my workload instead of improving it and what required one interaction with the GUI it then required three.
I honestly think that who says that Fedora is too hard or complain with NVIDIA for their drivers doesn't know what they are talking about and probably never tried themselves but just repeated what they read, like with many other things on the web (like 99.99% of EGLStream complaint).