Fedora 31 Should Be Out Around The End of November

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Fedora 31 Should Be Out Around The End of November

While Fedora 31 was once talked about to never happen or be significantly delayed to focus on re-tooling the Linux distribution, they opted for a sane approach not to throw off the release cadence while working on low-level changes around the platform. A draft of the release schedule for Fedora 31 has now been published and it puts the release date at the end of November...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Fedora-31-Release-Schedule-1

[orschiro]

Do they have plans to go rolling release any time soon?

[rene]

the question is: will we still be able to compile it from source? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TVpiXYqp3I :-/

[GdeR]

Do they have plans to go rolling release any time soon?

They would actually lose many users (me included) if they did that. Release upgrades are much easier to perform now more than in the past. "Rolling release" is not the model all distributions should aim at, as many of us just want a more predictable system, without giving up updated software.

[Britoid]

Do they have plans to go rolling release any time soon?

They have rawhide and branched?

In future with Silverblue you can switch between stable, branched and rawhide super easily.

[killyou]

Assuming release upgrade works without any issues I'd say going rolling release route is pointless since Fedora gets very frequent updates. It's certainly more stable than rolling release, easier to maintain while still providing up-to-date software.

[gilboa]

Do they have plans to go rolling release any time soon?

Given the 6 month release cycle, and frequent major component upgrades (E.g. kernel, KDE), why bother?

- Gilboa

[Compartmentalisation]

Do they have plans to go rolling release any time soon?

You might want rolling release if you're used to Debian/Ubuntu styles of releases, where packages rarely update, mostly only to fix security issues. With Fedora you do get a lot of updates after release.

What I would like is a LTS kernel option though. While issues with kernels for my hardware are rare, it's the only kind of update I do have issues with. And more focus on getting the more casual community members involved. Or maybe they don't want that.

[mattdm]

Rolling release makes less work for developers, and some adventurous users, but for most users it's better to batch big UX and possibly compatibility-changing updates and let the users decide when they want to do the update. For example, we're looking at updating to cgroups2. With a rolling release, that might be a "hope you read the announcement before you upgrade on the flag day!" event. With releases, we'll be able to make it a smooth part of the upgrade (and if you're not ready for it, you can keep on the older release for a while and still get security updates and bugfixes).

That's not to say we don't have options, though. As more Fedora packages start taking advantage of Modularity, you should have the option of selecting faster streams on top of the older release for things you really want to get the latest version of quickly. And, our really big infrastructure project this year is "Rawhide Gating" — we already have a rolling release in our Rawhide development tree, but we don't currently make any attempt to really make sure it always works. That's changing, so in the near future if you want a rolling release you can actually use day to day, that will be there for you.

On another note, I'm wondering if I should correct the misreading October vs. November on the schedule, or just let Phoronix be happily surprised.