Red Hat "decided" that short innovation cycle + long support cycle are mutually exclusive about as much as Galileo "decided" that the Earth orbited the Sun, not the other way around. I just hope that The Community is as forgiving about our "decision" as The Church was about Galileo's ;-) M On Mon, 2004-09-13 at 09:31, Rex Dieter wrote: > Daniel Roesen wrote: > > > No, RHEL has a too long innovation cycle. What I need is something > > like the Fedora release (innovation) cycle, together with a RHEL-like > > support cycle. > > And redhat decided that these 2 items, short innovation cycle + long > support cycle, are mutually exclusive. redhat would end up "supporting" > 5-6 releases (going back ~3 years @ ~ 6 month innovation cycle), which > would be unmanageable. Is that really what you want? > > Besides, IMO, RHEL is pretty good when it comes to innovation too. Are > there features missing from RHEL that you need? > > -- Rex >
