| |||||||||||||
Slipping or skipping Fedora 18Slipping or skipping Fedora 18Posted Nov 8, 2012 8:44 UTC (Thu) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183)Parent article: Slipping or skipping Fedora 18
My reaction to this sort of thing (usually it concerns Ubuntu, not Fedora!) is a feeling that distribution and development work should be much more orthogonal to one another. Not that I think distributions shouldn't do development too (I realise how much development in the FLOSS ecosystem comes out of RedHat), but I would like to see the development go into projects with clearly defined distribution-independent upstreams, even if those upstreams are in-house, so that they can be shipped "when they are ready" and if a new version is not ready in time the distribution can stick with the old one.
Obviously that wouldn't have solved all of the problems pointed out in the article, like the fact that the old Anaconda version had problems with the new initramfs infrastructure, but I think it might help.
(Log in to post comments)
Slipping or skipping Fedora 18 Posted Nov 8, 2012 9:05 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
the installer does seem to be a bit of a special case, but I seldom see a case of "this is so important a component that we are going to ignore the rules for it" work out well in the long run.
Slipping or skipping Fedora 18 Posted Nov 8, 2012 9:24 UTC (Thu) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183) [Link]
dlang wrote:
> the installer does seem to be a bit of a special case
Agreed, but not so special that it might not have other down-stream consumers. Some of the people who produce their own distribution spins might well be interested in using a good installer maintained as a separate project.
|
|||||||||||||