Re: Changes at Red Hat confouding CentOS (was: What happened to 6.1)

[Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Craig White <craig.white@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Nov 14, 2011, at 7:56 PM, Alan McKay wrote:
>
>>> Both CentOS and Scientific Linux *aim* at 100% binary compatibility
>>> and they are both doing their best toward that goal. However, neither
>>> is perfect.
>>
>> That's interesting.  So how is it they've managed to come out with 6.1
>> (and so long ago at that)?
> ----
> I got the impression that the reason owes to the fact that Scientific Linux is using a koji build server and had it up and running perhaps even before the 6.0 release.
>
> http://lwn.net/Articles/446556/
>
> But in truth, don't trust what the non-invested people might speculate to be the reasons, the real answers can only come from the developers themselves.
>

And note that one of the SL developers has taken a position at Red
Hat, so things might be different in the future....
http://scientificlinuxforum.org/index.php?showtopic=897

-- 
   Les
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos