On 1/23/2013 6:12 AM, James Freer wrote: > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:28 AM, David <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 1/22/2013 4:09 PM, James Freer wrote: >>> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Matthew Miller >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 11:02:35AM +0000, James Freer wrote: >>>>> I looked at that location and that's why i thought when installing F17 >>>>> that was the latest version. F18 goes down as the latest release but >>>>> no one says what problems they had with it. >>>> >>>> There's actually been a long, ongoing discussion about it. You can look at >>>> Fedora meeting archives or on the devel list for details. The primary delay >>>> in this case is the landing of the re-written Anaconda installer. >>>> >>>> Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ >>>> <[email protected]> >>> >>> I wondered if that was the problem as folk seem to have trouble with >>> F18. Personally i've been thinking again about 6 month releases. There >>> simply doesn't seem to be the time for developers to sort of >>> problems.... why not an annual release. The bi-annual release of >>> *buntu LTS means in the 2nd year apps being out of date. The 6 month >>> release seems to mean a lot of hard work in a short space of time. >> >> >> I do not now, nor have I ever, looked at the number of people that have >> problems, and yes there are some, as a true representative number of a >> distributions users. The users that have true problems ask for help. Or >> rant. :-) While those of us that do not have problems do not write. >> >> My guess? The number of users without problems far exceeds the number >> that do. >> > > David > >> Now a personal request. Please. Please don't start the semiannual thread >> about the release schedule time period. :-) > > I wasn't attempting to start a 'semiannual debate' - i was merely > saying that the 6 month release clearly gives a heavy workload for > developers... an annual release would 'release' them! I think they > work extremely hard and are perhaps not fully appreciated with the > challenges they are faced with.
And what I said was that with every release this subject is discussed to the point that it eventually turns into a flame war. The developers, not the users, have decided on a 6 month cycle for Fedora time and time again. A 9 month cycle was tried, once, and the developers disliked that. Notice that I said *the developers and not the users* decided on the 6 month cycle. If you feel that a longer release cycle would help *you* personally you might consider looking for a distribution with a longer cycle. Debian comes to mind as a very, very long cycle one. As well as Mageia which is 9 months with a support cycle of 18 months before EOL. There are others that are 'rolling update' models that update without a planned release cycle at all. They release a 'snapshot' (depends on the distribution) every 18 to 24 months. You have nice day. -- David _______________________________________________ xfce mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce
