* Les Mikesell [07/08/2007 16:45] : > > Interfaces broken by mid-version updates are just as broken in fedora as > they would be in RHEL and it's not any more a straw man for one > distribution than another unless you are willing to say that one is only > suitable for testing. This implies (to varying degrees) several things : - The two distributions target the same audience. - The two distributions claim equivalent support of API/ABI stability. - API/ABI changes are broken for the sheer heck of it. - Updates have no features other than changes in API/ABI. These implications range from "not true" to "false". Put together, they make a poor representation of the reasons why Fedora sticks to upstream whereas RHEL promises API/ABI stability which is why I call this a straw man. > If you want to say the changes are a good thing, > then lets see them in RHEL too. Ad hominem tu quoque. FWIW, its stagnation is one of the reasons I do not use RHEL (or clone thereof). > But, if you want to put that aside for > the moment, firewire will make a great example. Do you forsee a time > when you would keep your own backups or valuable data on a firewire > drive under fedora? Not having any firewire materiel, I can't answer the question. What exactly is the problem with firewire support in Fedora ? Emmanuel -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
