On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 12:25 +0100, Lance Davis wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2005, Matt Bottrell wrote:
>
> > On 5/12/05, Steve Bergman <steve@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > But as a user, I
> > > would as soon see CentOS focus on being a great RHEL clone, and the core
> > > essentials of providing quick and reliable updates and long term
> > > support. If the CentOS team started spreading themselves too thin I,
> > > and I'm sure others, would start to worry. CentOS is about faith in
> > > ongoing support. Not about maintaining live CD's. Leave that to
> > > Knoppix, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc.
> > >
> > > -Steve Bergman
> >
> > Have to agree Steve.
> >
> > I like CentOS as it's excellent for a RHEL clone without the $ tag.
> >
> > I think a Live distro if required is better suited under :
> > http://caos.caosity.org/
>
> I dont really see what difference it makes to anyone if we decide to make
> a live cd of CentOS ???
That sounds a little defensive. I hope you're not taking this
personally. I don't think anyone is saying the CentOS development team
isn't "allowed" to do a live cd. And the idea is perfectly fine for
testing out hardware compatibility, etc. My personal opinion was just
that I would hate for it to take any focus away from the distribution
running smoothly, or the purpose the distribution. Nothing more.
Preston
