On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 3:07 PM, Lamar Owen <lowen@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If you don't follow the Fedora lists and get involved, well,
> you get what you pay for, I guess.
Following the list just makes it more painfully clear that they don't
care about compatibility or breakage of previously working
code/assumptions or other people's work. It's all about change. I
tried to use/follow fedora for a while, but gave up when an update
between releases pushed a kernel that wouldn't boot on the fairly
mainstream IBM server I was using for testing.
> We already had Upstart, and the move from Upstart to
> systemd is not that big (at least in my opinion), so it's not something
> that got me up in arms.
Backwards compatibility isn't a big/little thing, it is binary choice
yes/no. If you copy stuff over and it doesn't work, that's a no, and
it is going to cost something to make it work again.
>> Don't think people running a bunch of RH5 servers really cared about X
>> or desktops at all...
>
> You missed my Red Baron comment, didn't you? I ran Red Hat Linux 4.1 as
> a desktop, and once Mandrake 5.3 was out I went completely Linux as my
> primary work and personal desktop. I figured if I was going to run it
> as a server I needed to 'dogfood' things and really rely on it for daily
> work. And my employer agreed.
Did you keep track of the time you spent keeping that working?
>> Yes, but on the other hand, people still pay large sums of money for
>> other operating systems. And there are some reasons for that.
>>
> Many of which are not technical.
Many aren't. And many are just a large base of stuff that works and
will break if anything underneath changes.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
