Jos Vos <jos@xxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 02:48:16PM +0300, Dmitry Butskoy wrote: >> One-year LTS is an acceptable compromise for me. But ideally, from the >> "production" point of view, I would prefer 9-month cycle (and hence >> 1.5year LTS) ... > > Wondering what the difference with using RHEL/CentOS + EPEL is then... RHEL and its derivatives, just like SUSE and Debian Stable, are comparatively conservative. I need e.g. working QinQ, and that means a 2.6.23 kernel. There's also a lot of software missing in RHEL -- like OpenSwan and Asterisk. If you update and add components to RHEL, you're going to lose out on support, as far as I know. (If I'm wrong and some enterprise distro maker is willing to offer support for OpenSwan and kernel 2.6.23, I'd be very happy to hear about it.) Fedora is very useful in production. It takes a bit more babysitting perhaps, but overall quality for server use is pretty good. /Benny -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
