Distribution quotes of the week [LWN.net]

A stable release into which we cheerily shove new versions of everything just for the hell of it really isn't a stable release, and it has no clear identity separation from the next or previous stable releases, and hence makes the whole idea of having releases rather pointless and just dead weight overhead.

-- Adam Williamson

Is this thing on? *tap* *tap*. Good evening friends, this is your openSUSE Board speaking. If you didn't hear yet, Novell has agreed to be acquired by Attachmate Corporation. What does that mean for the openSUSE Project? We don't know exactly yet because our crystal ball is currently in the shop and therefore fortune-telling is not our greatest talent ;-)

-- Pascal Bleser

(Log in to post comments)

Distribution quotes of the week

Posted Nov 25, 2010 10:06 UTC (Thu) by pebolle (guest, #35204) [Link]

Adam Williamson's quote does not really do justice to his entire post. For example, the quote is directly preceded by these sentences:

> It seems like what you want is actually not to have three releases at a
> time at all but to have one and update it constantly. And I actually
> rather suspect that would be a model that would work well for Fedora,
> and I'd like to look into adopting it. But it's *not* the model we have
> right now, and it [does] strike me as a bad idea to try and abuse a
> stable release model by pushing admittedly unstable changes into the
> stable releases.

(Obvious typo corrected.)

So in his post he actually says something that differs a lot from what the quote suggests and which is rather more interesting too.

Distribution quotes of the week

Posted Nov 25, 2010 17:38 UTC (Thu) by felixfix (subscriber, #242) [Link]

The previous lines added nothing to my understanding. I thought the original quote quite sufficient.