2011/6/14 Christiaan Welvaart <[email protected]> > On Tue, 14 Jun 2011, Thorsten van Lil wrote: > > I don't want a full rolling release, because of the listed disadvantages. >> So, if you ask me what is "wrong" with Arch, I would say: >> * due to the rolling release, it's nearly vanilla. This doesn't match >> requirements of Mageia >> * no innovations (because of vanilla) >> * a rolling core system has a negative correlation with it's stability >> * heavy work load >> * ... >> >> So, I don't ask for a copy of Arch nor any other distribution. I asked >> (although it wasn't my idea) for something new. An compromise: a light >> rolling release. >> > > This is exactly what release + updates + backports can be, the only > requirement is enough people to do the work. I do not understand what people > are saying about backports being "unsupported". IMHO we should either have > backports that are supported, with fixes for security issues and important > bugs, or no backports. >
I guess because of Mandriva policy. We did provide backports but it was explicitely said to be unsupported. "Use it at your own risks" We may have to rewrite this and make things clear > > > Christiaan > -- Anne http://www.mageia.org
