James Hogarth <james.hogarth@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> Unless I missed it, nobody has described a particular use case yet in >> which it is obvious that it is good to use CentOS. Upgrading holds its >> risks as well as using software that cannot be upgraded. The future >> cannot be predicted. So how do you make a decision like between using >> Fedora and CentOS? > > As much as I disagree with Harald on certain issues he did give you the > answer to this... You just choose not to hear it. I'm hearing it; I'm merely asking for a particular use case. > The key risk for upgrades in business is security fixes and not features - > these upgrades are present... Within the lifetime of a project you are > highly unlikely to be ripping out and replacing key bits of the application > stack. > > Vendors (including pure open source solutions backed by a vendor) will > support a long term distribution but not something like fedora where the > increase of cost for them to support it due to potentially massive changes > every 6 months is significant. So you are saying that, for some good reasons, you can generally assume right away that in business applications the risks involved with changes greatly outweigh the potential advantage of having new features and that you need something that doesn't change for at least three to five years? Does that make it worthwhile to use software that cannot be upgraded when it reaches its end of life (either because support ceases or because new features are needed)? -- Fedora release 19 (Schrödinger’s Cat) -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
