> Message: 6 > Subject: Re: how bleeding edge will the next fedora release be? > From: Preston Crawford <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: Fedora <fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 21:56:01 -0800 > Reply-To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 20:09, Matthew Saltzman wrote: > > Other than that, I think it's reasonable for Fedora's main line to run the > > latest *stable* releases of packages. Real bleeding-edge stuff belongs in > > testing and unstable sections of repositories, so they can be tried out by > > brave volunteers. Those of us trying to do useful work need at least a > > reasonable level of stability. The Fedora main line is designed for > > "developers and enthusiasts", but it should not be just a toy. > > There are some on this list who seem to disagree with you. I think they > may just be pushing Red Hat products. If this is the party line, maybe > it's time to start looking again. Please tell me this isn't what Fedora > is about. It's started out so promising. Preston, you seem to have missed the post where I referred to previous positions of redhat that 1) FC2 will not ship with 2.6 kern if 2.6 kernel is not stablilized, and 2) that FC should not include beta products. For example, the development process seems to have recently ruled out Mozilla Firebird for FC2, even though it is based on the STABLE 1.6 Gecko engine (for the 0.8 release). See http://fedora.redhat.com/participate/developers-guide/ch-package-versions.html 4. Beta releases are generally not OK I appreciate your concern, but the intent seems to be to make Fedora as stable, if not more stable, than RedHat ever was. What will change, is that absent 3rd party support, you will need to upgrade more often. But with yum, is less painfull too, so it's not such a big deal. I think you may be letting yourself get overly worked up, because to me it sound like Fedora will meet your needs well.
