On Tuesday 10 February 2009, Arthur Pemberton wrote: > On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 2:32 AM, Serguei Miridonov <mirsev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Monday 09 February 2009, Arthur Pemberton wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:03 PM, Mike Chalmers > > > > <mikechalmers70@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> Nothing else makes as much sense to me in the open source > >> >> world that isn't a 'paid' or 'enterprise' edition. > >> > > >> > Mark we are definitely on the same page. Open source works > >> > together, so it is very understandable why a rolling release > >> > is good, imo. > >> > >> I hope you at least understand why a rolling release is > >> technically difficult, especially in a distro like Fedora where > >> things can change radically from one release to another. > > > > Probably majority of users would not complain about radical > > changes in these frequent upgrades IF new releases don't break > > something that people use and rely on every day. With Fedora it > > happens every release. > > A symptom of radical change with limited testing (there only so > many testers) When I wrote about breaking something, I also mean removing features which people used in previous versions. -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
