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.