Talk Of Fedora As A Rolling-Release Distribution

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Talk Of Fedora As A Rolling-Release Distribution

Following word that the state of the Fedora 18 release is looking poor and the F18 Beta saw its sixth delay, there's now talk of turning Fedora into a rolling-release Linux distribution...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTIyMDg

[solo2101]

I like the idea.... fedora always release when its ready any way. That could ad even more stability and more life time to current releases....

[F i L]

I don't see the problem with rolling release. Manjaro Linux has the right idea. Take a "low level" rolling distro like Arch Linux, which sometimes requires a lot of manual labor to update (like with the switch from initscripts to systemd), then stagger key software a little while the devs write update-scripts to handle peoples machines correctly so users don't have to be Linux Gurus to use it. Easy to use, always up-to-date.. best of both worlds for the end user.

[pipe13]

I agree to leave Fedora's release mechanics as is. It ain't broke. Release when ready, not before. Let those who desire a rolling release, use a rolling release distro. I suspect most who use Fedora use it as a bleeding-edge *production* environment. I know I sure do.

[a2r-l]

No need to turn fedora into rolling release.

Here's a better solution:

Kill fedora, rename arch to fedora, and ... profit!!! Arch is eating up everything redhat is shoving down its throat anyway. Arch is becoming a lot like fedora, so there is no point in having 2 similar distributions.

[AdamW]

Just as a gloss...though I suspected Michael might pick this up, I was writing to fedora-devel, not Phoronix. If I was writing to Phoronix I'd be a bit more diplomatic. =)

My mail comes off as rather negative, but that was more a rhetorical tactic than anything. I would say that my mail could apply equally well to most Linux distributions that release on a six month cycle. The only major distros that I'd say are 'serious stable general-purpose OSes' by the definition I was using in the post are maybe RHEL, SLES, Debian stable, Ubuntu LTS possibly. That kinda thing.

I think Fedora is doing a good job of being Fedora, and all the negative stuff in my post really means is what a lot of people say about rapidly-iterated Linux distributions anyway; they're not really suitable for use by 'normal people'. Which shouldn't be news to anyone. We're enthusiasts, no shame in that. Really what I'm trying to say is we can achieve an appropriate level of stability and quality for Fedora - equal to the level we currently achieve - without the onerous release cycle.