Debian are probably the best example. The key commitment they make is that you can upgrade, from an up to date "stable" release, to the next via the distupgrade. Ubuntu claim that, but I've seen comment in the forum that there's issues, at least with Kubuntu, which may be expected given it's secondary status to GNOME.
What problems do you see in the rolling update approach? With online update and OBS we seem to have progressed considerably in that direction.
From a testing standpoint I would guess that it's hard to know what each "tester" has on his or her system with the rolling update approach. How does one misbehaving app affect another... for example if xorg is old will that break compiz? In an Ivory Tower development style as openSUSE is, you can control what xorg is used... so if it breaks compiz, you know where to look to fix things... in a rolling update, can you guarantee that everyone will be on the same level? Is that important? I don't know. Never worked with it.
From an end user point of view, I like the rolling update concept. I never have to reinstall... that's a good thing to me.
C -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org