Fedora's identity

Posted May 14, 2010 18:40 UTC (Fri) by Felix.Braun (guest, #3032)
Parent article: Of hall monitors and slippery slopes

There is certainly a niche for an absolute-bleedin-edge distro whose users aren't afraid of and able to deal with the occasional bump in the development process. In return they can be proud to be running the absolute newest FLOSS technology has to offer.

I know most major distros have such a bleeding edge branch: Debian has sid, Fedora has rawhide, OpenSUSE has factory.

How do these development branches compare in "edgyness"?

Is the controversy described in the article about the upload policy to rawhide? If that is the case, wouldn't it make sense for other distributions to copy Debian's three-way split of having stable for people who need a rock solid base, testing for tested development releases and unstable for you-oughta-know-what-you're-getting-yourself-into?

to post comments

Fedora's identity

Posted May 14, 2010 18:47 UTC (Fri) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

It's about the update policy for non-developmental releases. Fedora already has a permanent development branch called Rawhide, early branching for new development, updates-testing repository and updates repository. There are some debates around whether updates in general should favor new features or not, how long should updates be in updates-testing repo, should the transition be based on certain number of positive votes (karma) in the updates system etc.