Re: Tumbleweed vs 16.0

GMX via openSUSE Users <[email protected]> Fri, 26 Jun 2026 07:12:47 +0200

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.suse.general
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

TW is indeed stable and reliable. Besides, there's slow roll. If you
want all the benefits of being always up to date, combining it with
'slowroll' (meaning it runs with only a minimal number of updates) is
an alternative, too.

-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
Von: David C Rankin <[email protected]>
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: Tumbleweed vs 16.0
Datum: 26.06.2026 03:53:58

On 6/24/26 11:59 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2026-06-24 13:47, Carl Spitzer wrote:
> > What if any preference exists?
> 
> Notice that in TW you will be with the first people to experience 
> changes. It is bleeding age, ie, you can bleed. You will experience
> the 
> new features and the new bugs before other people, and we expect you
> to 
> explain them to us ;-p
> 

I don't know Carlos, I think you are selling TW short. The openSUSE
devs 
have done an excellent job with their build QA. Only recent hiccup of 
notice with Apparmor 5.0. That wasn't anything that couldn't be 
worked-around for a day or two until the updated profiles were worked
out.

Other than that, I'd agree with OldTimer, no more problems with TW than
with Leap. For two years I've driven TW as the daily driver since
moving 
from 15.4 on two boxes. No complaints, no real uptick in issues, no 
difference in package availability.

(now granted, I'm not using Plasma or Gnome, so I'm not bleeding-edge
on 
desktops)

The upside is you are always current, you never have an EOL issue and 
don't have to set aside a day or two for new install and tweaking of 
everything after EOL to get your desktop back.

Both SLES and TW have their place, but TW and the rolling-release model
doesn't mean giving up stability or reliability.

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 265 B)