On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 09:28 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2012-02-13 at 14:47 +0100, Nils Philippsen wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 11:08 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > Let me put it this way, then: Fedora is released on a six month cycle, > > > which is far faster than is usually considered desirable for server > > > usage. It has a 13 month lifetime, which is far shorter than is usually > > > considered desirable for server usage. Its key values and goals are > > > assuredly not compatible with typical server usage - e.g. "First - We > > > believe in the power of innovation and showing off new work in our > > > releases. Since we release twice a year, you never have to wait long to > > > see the latest and greatest software, while there are other Linux > > > products derived from Fedora you can use for long-term stability. We > > > always keep Fedora moving forward so that you can see the future first." > > > There are numerous practical policies derived from these values which > > > are clearly not optimal for server usage, such as the short freeze > > > times, relatively low barrier of entry to disruptive features, and QA > > > focus on installation and basic desktop use (we do virtually no QA on > > > any kind of server usage). Finally, there are *several* Linux > > > distributions available which have none of the above 'shortcomings' (so > > > far as server usage is concerned). > > > > I'd say the same 'shortcomings' also hurt the end user case. The > > non-technical people I deal with loathe how we often introduce new > > features and break stuff (or just their way of doing things) in the > > process, even in updates -- I've stopped counting the "Oh, updates. I > > wonder what you guys have broken now."-style comments by my wife. To me, > > Fedora is much better suited to be run on servers than by end users -- > > admins usually can help themselves in these situations. > > > > Don't take this as being against the slew of features Fedora introduces: > > personally I'm much in favor of systemd, the /usr move, pulseaudio and > > all that stuff -- there's no point in just treading water and being on > > the forefront of things is where Fedora is supposed to be. But let's not > > kid ourselves into thinking that with a life-cycle of only 13 months and > > the amount of change we introduce in each new release (especially on the > > desktop) we're somehow catering to end users who don't have a > > technically skilled spouse, relative or friend in the background to help > > if things don't work as expected. > > That also, at least arguably, isn't Fedora's aim (if it was, we'd be > doing a terrible job of it, I agree). To cite the Board again: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base > > "Voluntary Linux consumer > Computer-friendly > Likely collaborator > General productivity user" > > Those four - especially 'computer-friendly' and 'likely collaborator' - > don't scream 'end user' to me. My personal take has always been that > Fedora is not the friendly desktop operating system of today, but a > *prototype* of the friendly desktop operating system of tomorrow. A > constantly moving prototype - so it never sits still and becomes the > friendly desktop operating system of today. :) Of course :-). In the light of that however, I don't really understand the "Fedora is not for servers" arguments brought forth every so often... Fedora is not well-suited if what you want is longevity, full stop. Disregarding that point, Fedora on a server is quite hassle-free :-). Nils > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA Community Monkey > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora > http://www.happyassassin.net > -- Nils Philippsen "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase Red Hat a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nils@xxxxxxxxxx nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011 -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
