Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
There's a notion called freedom that you may have heard of.
And how is that specific to Fedora? I meant as opposed to a system
where you can actually deploy something that needs stability.
There are few distributions that I consider as free as Fedora and
none that I would consider more free.
OK, but how much of that freedom originates in Fedora? I don't see how
omitting more things from a distribution helps anyone. But that's a
different issue.
Local development for things you want to put into production progresses
at about the same rate as the system itself. If you wait for an
enterprise version's release before starting, you'll be about a year and
a half behind. If you develop on the previous enterprise version, there
will be a huge version jump in libraries, database versions, jvms, etc.
that will require changes and not take advantage of new capabilities.
This sounds like you have an issue with the entreprise distributions and
you're trying to shoehorn Fedora into being a stopgap solution for it.
Why don't you work with the entreprise distributions' communities to
find a better solution ?
The issue is that the enterprise distributions don't put their own brand
name on the early development work and ship it so users have a smooth
transition through development, testing and the final release. But the
reason that doesn't happen is that Fedora fills that role except for
providing a smooth transition to something production-ready. I don't
think it is me 'shoehorning' Fedora into the role that RH X.0 releases
used to fill.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
