On 9 July 2011 04:42, Rajko M.
On Friday, July 08, 2011 01:58:02 PM Karl Eichwalder wrote:
Maybe, you can fool users with "clever" naming, but only once. It is surely not worth trying.
Our only problem is to try a bit harder to be as close to conventions as possible, ie. meaning of Alpha, Beta and RC. Users didn't quit attempts to use development releases in a day, it took some time of upside down stability to run them away.
I don't know how possible is to have "normal" stability taking that distro has only what upstream offers and in 8 months there is a lot of upstream development, so loading Alpha with a new software, then making only minor changes during Beta and nothing, but bugfixes in RC, will result in final version few months behind upstream. With kernel, Firefox and possibly other major projects adopting rapid release of 3 months, that can mean quite old, possibly unmaintained versions shipped with release.
So rather than shipping the latest automatically, have some quality control! Which *currently* is the freshest release one can recommend as "worthy" to end users. Similarly where it makes best sense to upgrade package in 11.3 say, move the user base onto it, for a supported version which has security patches issued. In general, we have the tools to roll back package changes which expose "blockers" by having older rpm's available eg) FF 3.6, FF 4.0.1 & FF 5. A community distro can realistically, just make a best effort with available resources, there's no maintenance contract providing a revenue stream, to pay for back ports. Regards Rob -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org