On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 1:03 AM Leif Madsen <leif at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 5:07 PM Davide Cavalca via CentOS-devel <centos-devel at centos.org> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2021-07-08 at 16:22 -0400, Rich Bowen wrote: >> >> > Surprising users seldom goes well, even if it's an overall positive >> > surprise. >> >> What are our options for making it less of a surprise? We could post a >> blog, etc. about it of course (and we should, if we decide to go down >> this path), but that won't reach folks that don't follow the community >> closely. Maybe we should push an update to the default MOTD to let >> people know this is coming? Although, from personal experience, people >> tend to react pretty poorly to those kind of things as well sometimes. >> Any other ideas? >> >> I do agree that upgrading to 8-stream is strictly better than leaving >> systems unsupported, and that for the vast majority of users it would >> be a net positive. > > > What about moving to a security update only mode? It's not predictable if applied without testing. I remember when a security update broke curl, and required a curl-libs update to go with it because the security update broke it but didn't list the updated curl-libs as an RPM requirement. It's precisely why people appreciated the point releases: they could point to a base OS, apply updates on top of that, and schedule an upgrade to the next system with an organized set of updates. People will spend time emulating this by making local snapshots, just as I've done for RHEL internally and at far less cost than setting up spacewalk or RHN. I taught several departments of the BBC how to do that: some of my old tools are still at https://github.com/nkadel/nkadel-rsync-scripts .