On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 01:06:21PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Pavel Raiskup wrote:
> > Ok, I agree that Fedora needs modules for life-cycle separation.
> 
> I don't. I consider what you call "life-cycle separation" (I'd rather call 
> it "inconsistent EOLs") a bug rather than a feature.
> 
> This is yet another of those "features" that sound great on paper, but lead 
> to a horrible user experience in practice. Right now, it is easy to know 
> when you have to upgrade, as there is one EOL for the entire distro. With 
> inconsistent per-module EOLs, as soon as you have a non-trivial amount of 
> modules installed, it is impossible to track down when you need to upgrade 
> what. So either you end up with an unsupported version of the module without 
> even noticing, or you get forcefully upgraded at what will often be the 
> worst possible time.

But you get upgraded even now. Firefox gets major-version upgrades
even within the life of the Fedora version, as do other packages.

Yes, it might become a mess if the tooling is not right or clear. But
it is also an opportunity to potentially get a choice between stay on
the old, stable, vs. get the latest greatest.

-- 
Jan Pazdziora
Senior Principal Software Engineer, OpenShift Security Team, Red Hat
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to