What makes the chosen release model for Linux relevant? #1635
Unanswered
Ricky-Tigg
asked this question in
Q&A
Replies: 0 comments
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Good morning. It is unusual to provide each of the installation packages, tied to a version of a Linux distribution. In order to remain viable, such a release model must involve observing the release cycle of each Linux distribution supported by this software, as there is a risk of accidentally leaving an installer package available for download while it has reached the end-of-life status, thus rendering it unmaintained. Currently on the page, there is one case that illustrates this; it is represented by Fedora GNU/Linux.
The Fedora project provides a beta version of each of its new versions, for a duration of approximately one month. It is during this period that three versions are maintained; one in beta version, two in stable version. The duration of stable version is approximately six months.
Two installer packages for two versions of Fedora, each of a stable version, are here provided. At the time this ticket was created, it will be noted that the version which formerly was the
As a result, the installer package is no longer provided for the latest version of Fedora. A seemingly obvious solution to avoid this situation is to no longer tie each installer package to a version of a Linux distribution but to instead produce a single, general installer package for each of the supported Linux distributions, which would cover all of its maintained versions. Is tying installer packages to a version of a Linux distribution even a necessity?
Testing the compatibility on Fedora 39 of an installer package dedicated to Fedora 38, while the required dependencies were met – python3-chardet (python3-chardet-5.2.0-1.fc39.noarch) – demonstrates that it is operational.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions