Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

There Is Now A Proposal For Shifting Fedora To An Annual Release Cadence

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

  • #21
    And Debian admins are like: A new release every year?? Why the rush..

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by carewolf View Post
      And Debian admins are like: A new release every year?? Why the rush..
      Debian does not have fixed release cadence , it just aim at about 2 years cadence, but only release once it is ready:

      Release statistics

      Version Code name Freeze length Time from previous release Time from next release up to EOL Total lifetime
      1.2 Rex 178 days
      1.3 Bo 175 days
      2.0 Hamm 171 days 414 days
      2.1 Slink 125 days 228 days 76 days 601 days
      2.2 Potato 212 days 525 days 346 days 1049 days
      3.0 Woody 383 days 703 days 389 days 1442 days
      3.1 Sarge 34 days 1053 days 357 days 1028 days
      4.0 Etch 258 days 671 days 366 days 1044 days
      5.0 Lenny 202 days 678 days 365 days 1087 days
      6.0 Squeeze 184 days 722 days 391 days
      7.0 Wheezy 308 days 818 days 367 days
      8.0 Jessie 171 days 721 days
      9.0 Stretch 224 days 784 days
      https://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleas...ase_statistics

      Comment


      • #23
        Boring unapporoved again Do not ask me how much Debian Freeze will be, maybe you could conclude something from past statistics

        Comment


        • #24
          Fedora, keep a previous release supported for longer. Fedora keep F28 for one year from the F29 date. And run F31 as a rolling release. This way we satisfy most groups of users. Those who want snapshot and LTS and the ones who want to be on the bleeding edge. Fedora could do well to emulate SUSEs Tumbleweed rolling release concept and their biweekly full DVD release. Tumbleweed so has a network install version, a live ISO and a DVD iso.
          While I am a Fedora user for years, follow Tumbleweed / openSuse software mgt as a good model. It needs some review.

          My Tumbleweed experience has been very positive. Monthly, I download their latest DVD, which can be used for offline institute/recovery.

          Comment


          • #25
            Is IBM putting the pressure on RedHat to trim staff, ergo switch to annual releases. There would be cost savings as fewer staff to do the docs, and more in-depth testing.

            BTW, I am for the Arch/Tumbleweed/Solus/Manjaro maintenance model.

            Comment


            • #26
              The real problem here is of course that this would disconnect Fedora with Mesa and LLVM release cycles so you'd have fairly old drivers for last six months

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Vistaus View Post

                Solus uses a rolling release scheme as well, but they test everything very well before pushing it through people's throats. Manjaro does the same (although to a lesser extent). Fedora could do the same they do.
                You might still break user's flows. A distro essentially provides SDK for compiling against that distro. Most distros try to provide stable ABI for SDK for a given release. When that stable ABI starts meaning "okay, we need to build another LLVM in", it eventually starts hurting a lot.

                Comment


                • #28
                  ​Is IBM putting the pressure on RedHat to trim staff, ergo switch to annual releases. There would be cost savings as fewer staff to do the docs, and more in-depth testing.​​​​​​
                  I seriously doubt this... This isn't even a confirmed proposal, just a random idea.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Quite the opposite. If you follow mailing list thread, the argument against LTS release is that it is more difficult to maintain then to just release every 6 months whatever major version upstream is serving.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X