FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-12-2010, 03:32 PM
"John J. McDonough"
 
Default Stable Release Updates types proposal

Chris Adams wrote:

> Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> said:
>> If the infrastructure sucks where you live, what needs to happen
>> is that the infrastructure needs to improve, not that the whole
>> world adapts to stone-age infrastructure. Bandwidth is required
>> for many more applications than just fetching Fedora updates.

> That is just completely out of touch with reality. We live in the
> real world and have to deal with real problems; you can't just wave
> a magic wand and make them go away.

While many third-world countries have made high speed connections a
priority, these countries are often densely populated. In more rural
areas, high speed connections are economically impractical.

Here in Michigan, which is one of the more populous states, terrestrial
high speed connections are simply unavailable in about half the state.
Satellite connections are expensive, not terribly fast, and because of
the weather, very unreliable.

Much of this state has a population density less than 5 people per
square kilometer, and that is crowded compared to many of the western
states. At those population densities it will be some time before
technology will be able to deliver high bandwidth connections
economically to much of the population.

If you are sitting in the crowded cities of western Europe, it may be
hard to imagine a world where your nearest neighbor is a kilometer away,
but that is how it is in much of the world. The distances can be vast,
and hard to picture from inside Europe (or Manhattan, for that matter).

--McD


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-12-2010, 03:59 PM
Thomas Janssen
 
Default Stable Release Updates types proposal

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 5:32 PM, John J. McDonough <wb8rcr@arrl.net> wrote:
> Chris Adams wrote:
>
>> Once upon a time, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> said:
>>> If the infrastructure sucks where you live, what needs to happen
>>> is that the infrastructure needs to improve, not that the whole
>>> world adapts to stone-age infrastructure. Bandwidth is required
>>> for many more applications than just fetching Fedora updates.
>
>> That is just completely out of touch with reality. *We live in the
>> real world and have to deal with real problems; you can't just wave
>> a magic wand and make them go away.
>
> While many third-world countries have made high speed connections a
> priority, these countries are often densely populated. *In more rural
> areas, high speed connections are economically impractical.
>
> Here in Michigan, which is one of the more populous states, terrestrial
> high speed connections are simply unavailable in about half the state.
> Satellite connections are expensive, not terribly fast, and because of
> the weather, very unreliable.
>
> Much of this state has a population density less than 5 people per
> square kilometer, and that is crowded compared to many of the western
> states. *At those population densities it will be some time before
> technology will be able to deliver high bandwidth connections
> economically to much of the population.
>
> If you are sitting in the crowded cities of western Europe, it may be
> hard to imagine a world where your nearest neighbor is a kilometer away,
> but that is how it is in much of the world. *The distances can be vast,
> and hard to picture from inside Europe (or Manhattan, for that matter).

Hm.. Thank you for that post.

That was the first post who made me think different about the infra problem.
I'm still not with the idea to change Fedora completely. But i think a
compromise like N-1 as much as possible only security and bugfixes
(from our bugzilla only, so it's clear *our* users face them).
Includes to me no games with the kernel and other big packages of
software. Kernel just security fixes in updates. Bugfix releases of
the kernel either in a special repo for N-1 or from koji.
Keep N as it is to satisfy the people who want it leading edge. Means
the behavior as yet, except with autoQA testing and the other
improvements already mentioned to prevent breakage as much as
possible.

Rawhide the same as it is.

That should make anybody happy. People who expect Fedora as it is
right now, stay with N and people with lower bandwidth, infra
problems, can use N-1.

Could be started with F-13 release.

--
LG Thomas

Dubium sapientiae initium
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-12-2010, 07:18 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Stable Release Updates types proposal

John J. McDonough wrote:
> Much of this state has a population density less than 5 people per
> square kilometer, and that is crowded compared to many of the western
> states. At those population densities it will be some time before
> technology will be able to deliver high bandwidth connections
> economically to much of the population.

You have a good point there. I was in the Midwest (in Bowling Green, Ohio,
to be precise) with my parents for 4 months in 2001 and indeed we've been
surprised by the sparsity of population there.

But that still doesn't answer the question whether it shouldn't be up to
people like you to choose a distribution catering to your needs as opposed
to imposing them on the existing Fedora. The problem is, if all the
distributions optimize for people with low bandwidth, then what should
people like me who have higher bandwidths and would like to use their
bandwidth to get current software use?

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-12-2010, 07:21 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Stable Release Updates types proposal

Thomas Janssen wrote:
> That was the first post who made me think different about the infra
> problem. I'm still not with the idea to change Fedora completely. But i
> think a compromise like N-1 as much as possible only security and bugfixes
> (from our bugzilla only, so it's clear *our* users face them).
> Includes to me no games with the kernel and other big packages of
> software. Kernel just security fixes in updates. Bugfix releases of
> the kernel either in a special repo for N-1 or from koji.
> Keep N as it is to satisfy the people who want it leading edge. Means
> the behavior as yet, except with autoQA testing and the other
> improvements already mentioned to prevent breakage as much as
> possible.
>
> Rawhide the same as it is.
>
> That should make anybody happy. People who expect Fedora as it is
> right now, stay with N and people with lower bandwidth, infra
> problems, can use N-1.
>
> Could be started with F-13 release.

The problem with all the proposals centered on the idea of N-1 as
conservative, N as less conservative, including yours above and jreznik's,
is that it forces all the people who expect a constant type of updates to
upgrade twice as often, i.e. twice a year. Especially for the conservative
folks, this will be a big annoyance. With low bandwidths, you have to get a
CD/DVD shipped each time! In addition, I think the inconsistency will
confuse our users a lot.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-12-2010, 07:36 PM
Simo Sorce
 
Default Stable Release Updates types proposal

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:11 +0100
Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> wrote:

> The problem is, if all the
> distributions optimize for people with low bandwidth, then what
> should people like me who have higher bandwidths and would like to
> use their bandwidth to get current software use?

rawhide? F-13 ?

Simo.

--
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-12-2010, 07:42 PM
Simo Sorce
 
Default Stable Release Updates types proposal

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:21:41 +0100
Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> wrote:

> The problem with all the proposals centered on the idea of N-1 as
> conservative, N as less conservative, including yours above and
> jreznik's, is that it forces all the people who expect a constant
> type of updates to upgrade twice as often, i.e. twice a year.
> Especially for the conservative folks, this will be a big annoyance.
> With low bandwidths, you have to get a CD/DVD shipped each time! In
> addition, I think the inconsistency will confuse our users a lot.

I think you have to decide if you are siding for people with low
bandwidth or cutting them out.
You just said we cannot cater to people with low bandwidth.
Well stick with your point and don't swindle as soon as it doesn't help
you win an argument for argument sake ...

Users are confused and annoyed by too frequent upgrades. Those people
are fine sticking with N and then N-1 until security updates are no
more, and only jumping from N-1 to N+1 once a year. This includes many
developers I can assure you.


Simo.

--
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-12-2010, 07:49 PM
Al Dunsmuir
 
Default Stable Release Updates types proposal

Hello Simo,

Friday, March 12, 2010, 3:42:41 PM, you wrote:

> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:21:41 +0100
> Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> wrote:

>> The problem with all the proposals centered on the idea of N-1 as
>> conservative, N as less conservative, including yours above and
>> jreznik's, is that it forces all the people who expect a constant
>> type of updates to upgrade twice as often, i.e. twice a year.
>> Especially for the conservative folks, this will be a big annoyance.
>> With low bandwidths, you have to get a CD/DVD shipped each time! In
>> addition, I think the inconsistency will confuse our users a lot.

Fedora has traditionally supported upgrading from not just N-1, but
also N-2. Folks often skip releases, especially if they are aware of
problems (such as the pulseaudio and X issues) with a new release.

> I think you have to decide if you are siding for people with low
> bandwidth or cutting them out.
> You just said we cannot cater to people with low bandwidth.
> Well stick with your point and don't swindle as soon as it doesn't help
> you win an argument for argument sake ...

> Users are confused and annoyed by too frequent upgrades. Those people
> are fine sticking with N and then N-1 until security updates are no
> more, and only jumping from N-1 to N+1 once a year. This includes many
> developers I can assure you.
> Simo.

I've also run into cases where I tried to upgrade, but it failed to
install. I restored from backups, and kept using the older release
until I had time to do a fresh install. I do not believe my
experience is unique.

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-12-2010, 09:30 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Stable Release Updates types proposal

Simo Sorce wrote:

> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:21:41 +0100
> Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> wrote:
>
>> The problem with all the proposals centered on the idea of N-1 as
>> conservative, N as less conservative, including yours above and
>> jreznik's, is that it forces all the people who expect a constant
>> type of updates to upgrade twice as often, i.e. twice a year.
>> Especially for the conservative folks, this will be a big annoyance.
>> With low bandwidths, you have to get a CD/DVD shipped each time! In
>> addition, I think the inconsistency will confuse our users a lot.
>
> I think you have to decide if you are siding for people with low
> bandwidth or cutting them out.
> You just said we cannot cater to people with low bandwidth.
> Well stick with your point and don't swindle as soon as it doesn't help
> you win an argument for argument sake ...

You don't understand my point! Please make sure you understood what the
other person is saying before accusing them of hypocrisy!

Thomas Janssen is the one who proposed to cater to people with low bandwidth
by making the N-1 release (and only the N-1 release, not the N release) less
often updated. My argument is that this doesn't make sense because upgrading
every 6 months will suck for those people (and also for other user groups
who are asking for conservative updates).

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-12-2010, 09:33 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Stable Release Updates types proposal

Al Dunsmuir wrote:

>> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:21:41 +0100
>> Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> wrote:
>
>>> The problem with all the proposals centered on the idea of N-1 as
>>> conservative, N as less conservative, including yours above and
>>> jreznik's, is that it forces all the people who expect a constant
>>> type of updates to upgrade twice as often, i.e. twice a year.
>>> Especially for the conservative folks, this will be a big annoyance.
>>> With low bandwidths, you have to get a CD/DVD shipped each time! In
>>> addition, I think the inconsistency will confuse our users a lot.
>
> Fedora has traditionally supported upgrading from not just N-1, but
> also N-2. Folks often skip releases, especially if they are aware of
> problems (such as the pulseaudio and X issues) with a new release.

That's the whole point! People do this now, but having the two current
releases be supported in a radically different way (with radically different
update strategies) would make this no longer a viable option for many
people.

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 03-12-2010, 09:39 PM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Stable Release Updates types proposal

Simo Sorce wrote:

> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:11 +0100
> Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler@chello.at> wrote:
>
>> The problem is, if all the
>> distributions optimize for people with low bandwidth, then what
>> should people like me who have higher bandwidths and would like to
>> use their bandwidth to get current software use?
>
> rawhide? F-13 ?

No.

This has already been explained several times!

Rawhide is not the answer. It comes with disruptive changes (and there's no
real way to avoid this problem, see e.g. my replies to Doug Ledford's "To
semi-rolling or not to semi-rolling, that is the question..." thread for
details, but it has also been brought up in other threads), prereleases of
software which is only expected to be stable at release time, no testing
repository (so all the breakage gets dumped directly on the Rawhide user)
etc.

The upcoming release branch is also not the answer. It is not available at
all half of the time, and it is feature-frozen, so it doesn't actually get
the expected feature upgrades (and with a policy like the one you appear to
defend, it won't get them at all, not even after the release).

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:00 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org