On 12/17/10 8:18 AM, Peter Kjellström wrote:
>
> Longevity (things continue to work without breakage for a long time):
> This kind of implies "don't keep stuff continously updated to recent
> versions" don't you think?
It could work that way if the upstream developers of the thousands of included
projects understood the need for backwards compatibility to keep things working.
They don't.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: two cents or not two cents
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: two cents or not two cents
- From: Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 09:55:58 -0600
- Delivered-to: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <201012171518.36201.cap@xxxxxxxxxx>
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: two cents or not two cents
- From: Peter Kjellström
- Re: two cents or not two cents
- From: Lamar Owen
- Re: two cents or not two cents
- References:
- two cents or not two cents
- From: Sean
- Re: two cents or not two cents
- From: Peter Kjellström
- two cents or not two cents
- Prev by Date: Opinions wanted...user management options....Home network
- Next by Date: Re: Samba, id, uid, Active Directory and CentOS 5
- Previous by thread: Re: two cents or not two cents
- Next by thread: Re: two cents or not two cents
- Index(es):
 |