Although I imagine people don't want to spend too much time feeding the
trolls, I want to at least be able to post something showing that I was
trying to do the right thing before I write this off as a stupid troll
argument. So someone want to point me in the direction of some evidence
showing how much of a lie this is?
"“My guess is that Novell tries to elevate levels of participation in
OpenSUSE because that’s the distribution Novell feeds on. It hopes that
it can hide in the fog while others do all the labour.”
This describes exactly what Red Hat does with Fedora. Not that it was a
bad thing, as everybody working on or using Fedora is conscious ofusing
a bleeding-edge distro.
So, to explain in more detail: Fedora was meant to help the development
of Red Hat’s codebase with the help of the community. Red Hat uses
Fedora (good as it may be) purely as a test-bed, where they can try out
new technologies that could prove to be too unstable for RHEL without
any risk. Fixes from RHEL don’t go upstream to Fedora because the
codecase it too different. Not because of evil intent from Red Hat’s
side but just because the enterprise-distro and the
bleeding-edge-testing distro are too far apart.
The only part that is really negative about Fedora is that something
doesn’t happen before a release that happens before openSUSE-releases: A
decided corporate effort at bug-squashing. It doesn’t happen because Red
Hat cannot afford to put its complete ressources at de-bugging code that
they won’t use for their commercial product anytime soon (while for
Novell it makes sense because openSUSE’s code goes back into SLED, soon).
The result is that Fedora is a fine distro but a bit rough around the
edges."
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
