On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 06:47:00PM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Christophe Fergeau >> <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> I understand the need to have ISOs for various versions but I don't >> see why most people would have ISOs for different minor versions of >> RHEL? i-e if RHEL 6.3 is available to you, why would you want to have >> 6.2 as well? Not saying this doesn't happen but is this really common >> enough to care too much about? > > Because you just downloaded an ISO for the newest release that you want to > try, and you still have the older ISO around in case the new release is not > good enough for you (or just because you forgot). Yeah more like the corner cases, rather than usual/typical scenerio and as (or less) likely as having two copies of the same media. Hence the bug I mentioned. >> We had some discussion(s) about differentiating various variants of >> Windows OSs (professional, home etc) but you and I both agreed that >> separate OS entries will be an overkill for that. > > Nope, the agreement was about one not having different entries > per-language, not about different OS variants. That too, we have discussions on like everything. :) -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) FSF member#5124 _______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
