On 28 June 2013 14:43, drago01 <drag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:13:09 +0200 > > drago01 <drag...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > * Mirrors willing to have another pile of release bits > > * Marketing/press folks willing to put together stuff for the release > > * Docs willing to update any release notes, etc. > > * Any additional tooling needed if we call this 19.1 or something. > > Do we have to bump the release number? We can just update the images > and let mirrors resync. > > In the far past when this was discussed, it was expensive for multiple reasons:
1) Mirrors may not remirror static content. They do it once and then focus on directories that they know change a lot. It cuts down their network costs in a number of ways. So you end up with mirrors with one iso and others with other isos. 2) People get a version of ISO x and then compare the MD5/signature with the updated version and then start wondering if the website has been hacked. Emails on this can show up years and years later when no one remembers that the ISO was replaced for some reason. We still get requests and people using Fedora Core 6 images they just got.. All of these end up costing more in time and electrons than just spinning up updates.img or a .x version. Not counting the usual fight that has happened in the past for "why isn't my update not in the respin?" .. especially when some argument can be made that it is causing some sort of installation issue from my icons aren't right on this box to that selinux policy would help make out fo the box experience better. -- Stephen J Smoogen.
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
