That’s fine for installing patches to the same version, and updates to some major software, but you won’t receive all the new features, and since versions are only supported for 13-months you’ll stop receiving updates by then. It’s good to familiarise yourself with the release cycle https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/releases/lifecycle/

That’s still not how you upgrade from one Fedora version to another. Please try not to provide information you’re unsure about, it’s irresponsible.

This is the documentation: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/upgrading-fedora-new-release/

This isn’t a correct answer to your question, that’s why it’s getting downvotes.

OK well I’m not sure where the AppImage “purists” and Flatpak “critics” are but I’ve not really encountered them.

I mean they are two things that co-exist, it’s not like they’re in commercial competition. Flatpak itself is usually distributed as an RPM or deb.

What’s off? That looks like it might be useful.

That’s a good interview but what about it brought it to mind with 6.5?

It was ~20 years ago so my advice to myself then would be pretty irrelevant now. I messed up my laptop, and my advice then would have been don’t start with a laptop (because laptop compatibility was lacking back then compared to desktop, different times).

Thunderbird has all I need for RSS, newer style readers I find tend to be lacking in some way.

First of all I wouldn’t use a pre-installed OS (I would always wipe and install my own for security reasons).

Secondly: Thinkpads (at least when I bought mine, last year) let you buy them without an OS and don’t charge you for it.

Thirdly: the linked manufacturers above tend to be either US-centric and/or more expensive than Thinkpads.

Not sure why you’re being hostile to me but I’m not interested in an argument.

deleted by creator

If based on the thing I used most then it has to be Firefox!

If you want something more trivial but personal, openttd - the best game ever. :)

deleted by creator

Selling support or related services is one way, I think Stallman gave the example back in the day of how he made money through selling physical copies of software (before online distribution was universally viable). The software was free and could be re-distributed, but a profit could be made from providing the service of doing the distribution.

On a bigger scale (although they’re not so popular at the moment), historically Red Hat has been the go-to example for how to make money in the spirit of free software. They fund and contribute to many upstream FOSS projects, and in return they can make a fortune out of selling commercial support for that software, while the software itself is still free.

I believe if the developer wants to make money from their apps, there’s noting wrong with it, as long as they are ethical.

Nothing wrong with making money from FOSS apps, even Richard Stallman wouldn’t have a problem with that.

With open source it is “community software”, and if this aspect of it is strong then the line between users and developers can be blurred somewhat, ordinary users may feel attached in a similar way as developers, so @Rentlar@beehaw.org’s suggestions could still apply for getting a better response from the community.

Some communities also have to deal with a lot of demanding, entitled people (which I’m not labelling you as) and so may have set the defensive threshold a little high, and so coming across as being constructive about the project goes a long way.

Finally! I have a lot of good will towards this project and understand there can be setbacks, but having been lead to believe that the Flathub version would be the flagship release channel, and then waiting for almost a month for the big new release without explanation of the delay it’s not been a great look to be honest… hopefully they can seriously sort this out in future.

Yes I actually checked whether my flatpaks were updating properly the other day because of this. I think being the official package if anything I would have expected Flathub to have it first, or at least within a few hours. I understand that things don’t always go to plan but starting to get a bit impatient here with the lack of explanation.

But you’re comparing it to Debian Sid and Arch. Packages in Stream are mature, tested and ready to go in to RHEL, and updates are very conservative. Can you honestly not tell the difference between that and Arch?