On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, William Hooper wrote: > > Sam Barnett-Cormack said: > > Given the track record with redhat of how often upgrades go wrong, > > The upgrade on my laptop from RHL9 to FC1 went completely without problems. > > > and > > the fact that such an upgrade requires more downtime, I think a lot of > > people will worry about that. > > I would prefer more planned downtime than the downtime that comes from > breaking something. All upgrades will require downtime, some more than > others. As I said in a previous post, trying to get a distro to upgrade > through yum, etc. isn't a bad thing, just as long as people understand > that it may not be possible in some cases (like FC1 -> FC2 IMHO). APIs, > config files, library versions change, and trying to change these while > you are using them can cause Bad Things (tm). Your points are well made and valid - I suppose some things are a matter of taste, although those points you make seem to not affect other distros already using the rolling model. > > Is fedora there to provide a good distro to users, or to exploit users > > to redhat's commercial benefit? > > You'll have to pardon me for not looking over my shoulder for the black > heliocopters... > > Fedora IS the community. So the community is there to provide a good > distro to the community. You would probably do well to get over the "I'm > a user, Fedora owes me..." mentality. I far from think that, I apologise for any offence I may have caused the developers. However, I stand by my point that the part of the community doing the development does need to listen to the wishes of the users. -- Sam Barnett-Cormack Software Developer | Student of Physics & Maths UK Mirror Service (http://www.mirror.ac.uk) | Lancaster University
