Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Future Of Fedora Gets Debated, Again

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

  • #21
    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


    • #22
      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


      • #23
        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


        • #24
          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


          • #25
            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


            • #26
              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


              • #27
                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


                • #28
                  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


                  • #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?
                    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


                    • #30
                      I am not using fedora very long... only on one machine... it has some problems... but I also like it... I vote for both ^^ for me I like to get gnome 3.7.2 so I have to use rawhide... but on the other side I cant just use bleeding edge on all my systems... ^^ so I did not switch yet from my server/htpc from ubuntu to fedora ^^ but thats maybe also only because I have to less experince with fedora and are because of that not ready to risk here breaking something.

                      So to say that fedora maybe only keeps its very core users if they focus on bleeding or cutting edge is maybe wrong I think... yes maybe they get not very attractive then for windows-switchers... but they maybe steel much "hardcore users" from other distros.... So I am not the typical ubuntu user, I used gentoo, debian and some others before it, but it gives descent level of availibility, so you can get most what you want from betas or from ppas... and its nearly new enough if you use this features. As example debian fails their in that they are just not focused on desktop... they dont have a full gnome 3.7.2 in unstable or experimental yet... so they are not very attractive for desktop users that are not very very conservative... and they also have not the same level of new packages in unstable over the complete release cycle... so if it goes near a release also unstable and testing gets older that sucks...

                      So if fedoras rawhide stays cutting edge even near a release I would like that very much. Is that like that? So if you want to make releases additionaly to that, what I think is a good idea because then I can use the same distro on the pcs of my releatives, where they dont want to have cutting/bleeding edge, then I like the generall release sheme of ubuntu, release early and often and time based... 1 year is to long, just release a good time-period fixed to gnome. 6 months is a good release cycle and making something like lts for others too if your 6 month releases are at the beginnging as buggy as they are, or call at least each 3. release or so to be better supported... or each second dont care much...


                      I think at the moment many Ubuntu users search a new home... some because of unity and switching away from gnome-vanilla, some because of the ongoing always getting worse moral desitions canonical makes with spyware and shit commercialising the distribution... many of the ubuntu users that have some background with free software idiolegy even if they stay a bit practical with it, start to feel worse and worse using ubuntu. So fedora should use that alternative-search-time-span we have now... so its not good that just now they have bigger problems with releaseing stuff and installers...
                      Last edited by blackiwid; 12-10-2012, 09:01 AM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X