It has been a while since news of the possibility of Fedora becoming a rolling release came to light after the matter began to be seriously discussed on the mailing lists.
Now, I have always kept my eyes on Fedora although my attempts to install it and put it into production are frustrated in many cases, but that does not stop me and I am still interested in this specific distro. The thing is that Fedora has been a while, since release 14 I think, began to give very little support to its versions and put "the latest" in each new release; Which is not bad for me but it is not correct to stop supporting others so quickly just by putting the latest in others, I don't know but it seems somewhat exaggerated.
But hey, all this Fedora in rolling format sounds very juicy since that short and disgusting support would cease to exist to become a single download distro. Ok, ok, interesting, but after discussing this with a friend I got to see the background to all this and how counterproductive the current Fedora release system is.
First of all and for the sake of truth, if you want to have a distro with "the latest" then it needs to be rolling, with everything and the problems that this may bring (example: KZKG'Gaara's kernel panic).
Within this discussion several interesting themes emerged, such as; If Fedora goes rolling ... would it be KISS too? And well, I really doubt it, Fedora does not pride itself on being a lightweight distro, it cannot boast of saying "I'm like Arch and I touch your balls many times in the name of simplicity" or like Gentoo, who takes that well to heart of "do it yourself", so a KISS philosophy would not go at all well with Fedora. The other is that they always want the latest, the latest, period, simply becoming KISS is not something possible for Fedora, not as it is now and I do not see it as a good choice (Courage, abstain).
An interesting point of the conversation was the question that a newbie friend asked us: But if you wanted the latest, why didn't you roll from F15 all at once? Which for sure I don't know how to answer, but I think it was because of that story that a complete system of organization and logistics was already established around the cycling model and, come on, it breaks your nuts that they come and right off the bat " Ay, we are rolling = D Problem? ”. But here the truth even I was left with the doubt since seeing it from a more objective point of view and using the knowledge about GNU / Linux, what bloody logic would it have to want to have everything new in releases of 8 months? It is like saying that today you eat a Mc'Donalds hamburger and put on your list “try the new hamburger in 8 months”, there is the contradiction of the current Fedora system and that makes many of us fail in favor of the idea rolling.
In the long run, of course, everything is going to have repercussions, both good and bad.
The bad news will be, for example, that all releases prior to the new rolling transformation will be unsupported, either immediately or in a short time. It could also be that at first they have big problems with the whole logistics issue and that this is reflected in a somewhat declining quality in the distro, something that will be fixed without a doubt. Another problem would be the community, not everyone will have to support this and I am sure that many still like Fedora 14 because it has Gnome2 and if they get a rolling they send them to give them ... That from the bad side.
Now for the good we have the fact that for the sake of the saints and Tux we would no longer be forced to change or update distro because the new release simply has extremely useful things that will not reach the release you already have, like Gnome 3.2 + extensions in Fedora 15.
Another tip in favor is that Fedora wants to start betting heavily on the free cloud and the whole thing; In fact, I always stand firm saying that Fedora is the best distro to program there is, it always has a good repertoire in this regard and this could improve if it is rolled, although it could also deteriorate, it all depends on how they know how to handle all this.
Personally, I have declared that I want to gamble with Fedora 17 again, even if it costs me a bit, but come on gentlemen, what do you think about this whole matter?
I do not abstain because you are a ubunto and also I do not listen to people hahahaha.
Well, I don't like it, in any case the two branches, Current and Stable, would be better
By the way, correct that carcamal title
Yes, my finger went off, it's release.
I do not know, if I would like a Fedora rolling, but it is something delicate and I doubt that for F17 they will put it into practice.
Regarding Kiss… Fedora will never be Kiss xD
What is the difference between KISS and roling?
They are independent things, for more information read this:
http://theunixdynasty.wordpress.com/2011/06/06/el-principio-kiss/
I like Fedora, the only low point I found is that packages are always dropped and there are problems with that.
I attribute that type of complications to the release cycle every 6 months, it is a very short time to review and test so much, I think a rolling would be a good idea but with a slower timing.
I would like it to do a rolling but like the chakra one that is half rolling (they wait for the drivers to be updated before I send the latest from X.org for example)
As for rolling realace, the truth is that using archlinux (I have installed it for about a year) and looking at the latest news from the arch website, which tells you if you should make any changes after an update, I have had almost no problem (less problems than with ubuntu I must say, although this may be due to the extra repositories that xp adds).
It sounds pretty good, now I use archlinux but fedora has always interested me, I have used it but I don't like the .rpm very much although if it does roll I might try to stay in it 😛
I do not know, in short, rolling release distributions are not my thing, that of having updates every two by three, and not to mention the bugs it may have. As for Fedora, it seems to me that the way it is doing is fine; it also has a very different niche of users than Arch's. And as long as it's not a fact, I don't think anything can be said.
Personally, I prefer to have something stable and that works quietly without the need to reinstall every so often, what's more, if possible without reinstalling. Better to have quality than quantity, that's why I use the LTS versions of Trisquel.
Greetings.
If it became Rolling Release it doesn't have to be KISS too.
There are distros that are KISS only, others that are only Rolling, and others that are both.
That's right, xD, PCLinuxOS is rolling and it's not KISS, and it's still great: P, I do prefer KISS, but still fedora rolling looks good, let's hope it gets done 😛
Or they could do something like openSUSE's tumblweed.
Best OpenSuse Rolling Release.
Fedora ... It is one of the distros that can become whatever they want. I think the idea is great. I love rolling, rpm-wise, packaging is the least of it, look at Arch haha. Long live yaourt!
Fedora 14, if I'm not bad, no longer has support, each version has a certain time, a rolling version similar to RedHat who has shown that it is well accepted, the experience is there, and let's not say projects like pclinuxOS I don't see a problem with launching this type for Fedora, would actually be great. The configuration and packaging, repositories are the best that exist; a stability superior to the other distributions, they instead of waiting for the patches etc, they are the first to fix it by themselves, a small example the energy management (solved for a while), and that thanks to them will be implemented with the new kernel 1.3.5 from which many distributions will benefit; We do not rely on extremely dangerous ppa and have been shown to be vulnerable to entering malicious code in this way. The problem that many face in Fedora is that they don't read, they don't like to read, and they don't know what they need; there are many post-installation guides. Fedora is end-user friendly.
Fedora has always caught my attention. In fact, I was about to try the 15 to test freshly baked Gnome-Shell, but I found out early about the problems I had (and still have) with the ATIs. Back then I used Ubuntu, but now I'm with Arch and I've gotten used to the Rolling (especially the convenience of not having to reinstall the system to have the latest and not having to "clean" it after each installation) If Fedora were rolling I would surely give it a try (as long as Catalyst solves its problems with Gnome-Shell, because for XFCE I stay in Arch), and whether or not KISS is really not taking my sleep, it's true, it's comfortable to install only what you need but, for example, Ubuntu always took kilos and kilos of bullshit and in the end I left it only with what I really needed, although after each reinstallation I had to do the same and there were no problems to remove obstacles, (ahem, Evolution) so in the end I moved to a Rolling.
Hi Arch, can I install Gnome Shell?
Well of course man, you can install the environment and the shel you want
* shell
ohh how excellent !! That means that if I install the gnome shell, it will update itself as a new version comes out, right?
How are the audio and video codecs installed in Arch?
I ask all this to be prepared in case I have to do the installation at any time
Are we talking about Fedor rolling release? A rolling with rpm parcel ??? Damedamedamedamedame !! xD