On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 12:32:54 -0600 Mike Vanecek <fedoraleg_form@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 08:44:38 -0800, Vincent wrote > > http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/newss/5137/1/ > > > > Novell/progeny will be offering pay-for support on the RHL 7.2 and > > 7.3 line for $5 per machine, per month or $2,500 for unlimited > > machines. Instead of re-inventing the wheel It's my opinion that the > > contributers of this list concentrate on _only_ fedora-legacy and > > not the RH 8.0 and 9.0 line. > > I believe you may find several, including myself, that disagrees with that > position. > > > The users in this category are > > generally faster moving then the 7.2-7.3 folks who don't want to > > touch their servers. > > Not necessarily. I'd be happy to be on RH for the next 3 or 4 years. I was aware it was a blanket statement that is why I put 'generally' in there. My way of thinking is you cannot please everyone, but you could shoot for what pleases the majority, and do it better. This would not be a concern if this list had more contributers but it seems relitivly low on resources. Also, maybe you could use RH for another 4 years but you should have known when you bought/downloaded it, it surely would not be supported that long. That would be 7 yrs or so. This is moot since someone has already taken up the 7.x line. I would say the _desktop_ users out there refussing to update from 7.x are few and far between, those with an army of servers now have a pay option so why should fedora-legacy use resources on this is my point. If your company cannot afford $120 a year for updates then distribute those from scripting or an in-house up2date server, id say that business has bigger problems than updates. > > > This would result an 'in between' user base > > which is apparently what the fedora-legacy project was created to > > accomplish. It would also benefit Redhat as to move them to the > > 'testing' line and not leave users in the RHL line which does the > > Company little good. > > My concern is more oriented to my needs than those of Redhat. > > I apologize if this has been discussed in depth, I'm new to the list > > and tried to read as much of the archives as I could before starting > > a thread. > > Indeed, it has. my apoligies > > > -- > > fedora-legacy-list@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list
