> It sounds to me like "your big beef" is that you can't run the CentOS
> distribution the way *you* want it run. Whether you agree or not,
> doesn't change the fact that CentOS *is* enterprise ready.-- and many
> enterprises use it. The only time there are significant delays in
No, I would just like the name and website to match the facts. I would suggest
that anybody that calls centOS "enterprise-ready" might have a different concept
to what an enterprise is to me. Enterprise to me is at least a 1000 users and
dozens of live servers. If CentOS is only suitable for test environment then I
don't really class that as enterprise-ready, either.
>
> As for rebuilding, why would you want to rebuild CentOS? Why not do
> what CentOS does and get the sources directly from Red Hat and rebuild
> that? Obviously you must think there is still some value in the CentOS
> name.
>
I was just trying to illustrate a point, rather than actually wanting to do it.
> --
> RonB -- Using CentOS 5.6
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
