3 ms·
Doing an LTS release is every expensive, and since the bulk of Fedora is done by community volunteers rather than 9-to-5 packagers, it's not something we can re
by mattdm 10y ago
Doing an LTS release is every expensive, and since the bulk of Fedora is done by community volunteers rather than 9-to-5 packagers, it's not something we can really fairly ask.
One of the funny things we often get is "Fedora should be LTS. Or rolling-release!", which is odd because these things are generally at complete odds — no change, or constant change.
We think we have a better approach: consistent, quality-checked releases which it's easy to upgrade between. Personal anecdote: I just updated my system to F26 Alpha — started the process, went to lunch, came back and found it done. No hit to my productivity.
And, as I just mentioned in another post, we're working on another thing, [Modularity](https://docs.pagure.org/modularity/ https://docs.pagure.org/modularity/), which will allow us to provide consistent applications and interfaces across those releases.
- karlmdavis 10y agoI totally get that -- and it's a perfectly reasonable stance. Every distro doesn't have to be all things to all users. Yay for distro choice! But I'd keep my more general point in mind, too: that thread had the wrong question and the wrong audience to answer the "what should Fedora do?" question. You might try to start a similar, separate Fedora-specific thread in a few months and see what feedback you get. I'd bet it'll be significantly different.
- mattdm 10y agoI actually _did_ several months ago (with a desktop and developer-audience focus): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12703836 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12703836
- phaylon 10y agoI would assume LTS and rolling releases align for some people due to impact on the user. LTS gives a long time between impacts, rolling releases spread the impact out over time. I could see every-n-months releases to hit a bad spot of too frequent for the size of the impact for some people.
- mattdm 10y agoI can see that. The overall message, though, is people want less negative impact from upgrades, and there are multiple ways to address that, of which LTS and rolling-release are only two of the possibilities.