One of the most common topics about Fedora is what to call our release model.
‘We’re a stable release because we have major versions.’
“No,” say the Ubuntu and Debian crowd, “we are the actual stable releases because we go years between LTS versions and make sure everything is rock solid.”
‘Well, are we a rolling release? That doesn’t seem right.’
“No,” says the Arch crowd, “because we get the latest packages as soon as they are available and we have no major releases!”
‘Then what kind of release model do we have? We have major versions - we just don’t wait so long between versions like other distros do with their LTS versions. We have up to date packages, but we test them before pushing them out to users rather than just sending them out. What’s the best name for how we do things?’
The most common term used to solve this is semi-rolling release. I think this kind of works because it clearly indicates that we are somewhere in-between a rolling and stable release. If we want to settle on this language, I think that’s fine.
However, seeing how we are kind of an outlier with this release model, I think there could be room to explore other terms that we think do a better job of describing what we do. Or we can try coming up with a new one if we’re feeling adventurous.
The other reason I would like for us to think about terms is to start undoing the idea that Fedora is a bleeding edge distro. We test out software. We are not bleeding edge. Just because you are using the latest version of software doesn’t mean you’re bleeding edge. It means you’re up to date. In my opinion, Linux is unique in describing the use of the latest version of software as bleeding edge. Everywhere else, you’re just on the current version.
Regardless of what term we feel the most comfortable with, we can start incorporating it into our messaging so that we can answer that question once and for all. Debian is a stable release distro. Arch is a rolling release distro. Fedora is a ‘___’ release distro.
What do you think?
As far as I’m concerned, Fedora should be called the stable release model, Arch can keep rolling release, and Debian/Ubuntu should switch to ‘LTS release model’. I know that’s not happening.
When software comes out, we test it to make sure it’s not going to break things, and then we push it out because it’s done. Debian and Ubuntu wait to long to push updates when they don’t need to, and Arch doesn’t wait enough because they don’t test. If I’m feeling spicy, I might say Fedora is using the ‘correct’ release model, lol.