Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 05:10:29PM +0200, Matej Cepl wrote:
On 2008-10-10, 14:36 GMT, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
What should do some previously RedHat-oriented enthusiast, when
all the area for application of his enthusiasm is some
"production environment"? Use RHEL/CentOS anywhere and Fedora
on his laptop only? But RHEL/CentOS is far from the "bleeding
edge", hence his enthusiasm just disappear...
Think about that and repeat until you get it -- "distro is either
bleeding-edge or stable; tercium non datur".
It is a bit more complicated. A distro may begin its life bleeding edge
and become stable as time goes by, if it is still maintained. And a
stable distro may have parts that are bleeding-edge. This is not
necessarily easy to implement, but these scenarios certainly have
merits.
That was the way things worked when redhat developed its popularity. An
X.0 release was approximately as unstable as a fedora, but as it
updated to X.2 or X.3 it would have become very stable and people who
started a development cycle with the early versions could keep the same
OS in production as it matured. What we need for the same effect now is
for the versions of fedora that provide the initial RHEL cuts to offer a
seamless update to the subsequent matching CentOS, repointing to its
update repositories for continued support.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
