From what I can tell, GNOME OS doesn't just ship latest stable GNOME, but also goes out of its way to try to ship the latest stable Linux-ecosystem concepts too.
Its a lot harder for Fedora since they need to support 43 upgrading to 44, but also 42 to 43 to 44, 41 to 42 to 43 to 44, etc. And in some cases there is enough of a difference in those upgrade paths to cause issues, even with the immutable Silverblue (I know since I got bit by an issue that began ~2+ versions before the issue ended up being triggered!).
"You may have to re-install in the future" gives GNOME OS a massive amount of flexibility right now, when GNOME OS has fully stabilized, plus 10 or 15 years, Fedora Silverblue and GNOME OS will probably be in the same place, but until then, GNOME OS just benefits from starting later.
> "You may have to re-install in the future" gives GNOME OS a massive amount
But that means it's unusable as a daily driver? They will have to give up this approach at some point when they stabilize, so again I don't see any advantage over Fedora. If anything, what you quote is a disadvantage to me.
> I know since I got bit by an issue that began ~2+ versions before the issue ended up being triggered!
This is still something that is avoidable, it's just down to their choices where they do not remove obsolete software. I believe this should be openly communicated at upgrade time, but the previously-mandated leftovers should be removed.
From what I can tell, GNOME OS doesn't just ship latest stable GNOME, but also goes out of its way to try to ship the latest stable Linux-ecosystem concepts too.
Its a lot harder for Fedora since they need to support 43 upgrading to 44, but also 42 to 43 to 44, 41 to 42 to 43 to 44, etc. And in some cases there is enough of a difference in those upgrade paths to cause issues, even with the immutable Silverblue (I know since I got bit by an issue that began ~2+ versions before the issue ended up being triggered!).
"You may have to re-install in the future" gives GNOME OS a massive amount of flexibility right now, when GNOME OS has fully stabilized, plus 10 or 15 years, Fedora Silverblue and GNOME OS will probably be in the same place, but until then, GNOME OS just benefits from starting later.
(Not saying either is better than the other)
> "You may have to re-install in the future" gives GNOME OS a massive amount
But that means it's unusable as a daily driver? They will have to give up this approach at some point when they stabilize, so again I don't see any advantage over Fedora. If anything, what you quote is a disadvantage to me.
> I know since I got bit by an issue that began ~2+ versions before the issue ended up being triggered!
Indeed, these things happen, e.g. this discussion literally from today: https://www.reddit.com/r/Fedora/comments/1x7zgol/fedora_45_h...
This is still something that is avoidable, it's just down to their choices where they do not remove obsolete software. I believe this should be openly communicated at upgrade time, but the previously-mandated leftovers should be removed.