On 5 October 2010 18:54, Tux99 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Quote: Ahmad Samir wrote on Tue, 05 October 2010 17:41 >> >> A rolling distro isn't a defined term, as Michael explained, now you >> add "light" to the equation and it becomes even more undefined. > > You shouldn't look at the name but rather at the description that me and > others have given here earlier. >
I looked at the description that Michael gave. And I think I know what a rolling distro is having Cooker and all :). light/heavy makes no sense here. >> I said all I got to say on this topic, now I can wait and see how >> things turn out (my guess would be it'll stay the same, Cauldron a >> rolling/dev distro, and stable releases on predefined intervals, just >> my "personal" guess). > > I guess that depends mostly on what the packagers will feel like doing, > ultimately in a community distro nobody can be force anyone to do > anything, if too few people are doing security fix backports but most are > doing version backports then we will have this 'light' rolling distro (or > whatever you want to call it), if not then we will have the old mdv > model. > > It's not I'll-work-my-own-way-and-do-what-I-want, any packager can do so in his own repo/distro. There'll be rules which should be followed even in a community-driven distro, otherwise it'll be chaos. -- Ahmad Samir
