On 11/14/18 7:54 PM, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 4:42 PM, John Florian <jflor...@doubledog.org>
wrote:
I still don't understand what makes updating these for a *new*
release significantly easier than an *existing* one. So let's
just say GNOME (or whatever) comes out next month with a new major
release we want to showcase. Why is it necessary to have a
Fedora 30 to be able to realize this update. What is so
difficult about providing this for Fedora 29. I'm trying to
understand why these upstream updates can't be decoupled from the
Fedora release schedule.
It's all a matter of QA. The freeze, the blocker bug process, and the
quantity of users who test the stuff for us. We'd need major changes
to our updates process to account for this in a mid-release update.
The blocker bugs process would be needed, for a single bodhi update.
At leas t a month or two of testing (during which new versions of the
update will be released, so the update will have to go through some
iterations). And lots and lots of testers: currently we get those for
free because tons of people help us test beta releases of Fedora, I
think far more than run updates-testing.
I think if we did this right, however it looks, multiple testing repos,
rings, modularity, whatever... we might easily attract more testers than
we have now. I think this whole problem can usually be distilled down
to, "I want LTS for everything because I hate breakage and I hate tech
treadmills because I've already got too much to do. Except for Foo, the
version every other distro has is too old and I'm willing to get dirty
if necessary because Foo is what matters to me."
This is all doable and solvable. Not a blocker. But if we don't take
it seriously and make some big changes in how we release updates, it
won't go well. Not well at all. So I'd recommend against it, unless
there is some major benefit available from doing so.
I totally agree, but we are talking about radical changes here and I
think we should keep all options on the table. If some particular path
forward is overwhelmingly desirable, that is the time to decide if the
push is worth it, not earlier IMHO. If the proposal, whatever it be, is
great and everyone agrees its great, the seriousness will be
automatic. Fedora has a long history of catering to some niche ideals
that parts of our community are dead against. It's awesome that Fedora
is so flexible, but if we're going to fiddle with the release model,
lets find something we *all* get behind and be happier with for the next
15 years, however radical it might look like right now.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
