This information was found in a single click from the Fedora web site. http://fedora.redhat.com/download/updates.html Notice what is considered a "Fedora Update", a "Proposed Fedora Update", and a "Development Package". Fedora updates are available by using up2date. Anyways, I think people are getting freaked out for no reason when they are getting the same deal they got for 60 for free if they were using RH8 or 9. I feel looking to Debian, SlackWare, or any other distrobution or *BSDs without any type of financial backing like Red Hat or SuSE will lead to dissapointment considering the very point of the debate in the first place. These guys are maxed out on their resources as it is. They just aren't going to be able to compete in certain areas because they only have developer interest to keep the ball rolling. I say that but also add that the ball is rolling, but there is no corporate incentive to help guide it along as you'll find in a Red Hat or SuSE. These influences push things like auto updates or compatibility with software and hardware vendors. One can truly compare Fedora to Debian or Slackware if they also include the corporate interest as a factor. This is the only way. Fedora will be guided in a more corporate direction than a Debian or Slackware. That is just a simple fact. We have to include corporate interest and what that means in any logical discussion. As far as automatic updates go I believe the above link should shed a little lite on the topic. As far as whether or not the distro will be available for a said time period and remain consistent. I believe the Fedora project will level the stability. RH shifted gears trying to make this model and that model fit their needs. Now they have decided to go more open and allow some free lance developers take part in the burden. This is surely good for them, and if Red Hat at some point did decide to pull out of the Fedora project then you may have a new Red Hat clone distro called Fedora with no Red Hat. But, the project being the project it is will probably continue to follow it's current direction, and would probably copy Red Hat utilities to keep consistent with the way it has been operating. This one is of course just an assumption, but fairs well against the open source methodology that these types of projects tend to follow: "If someone bails out, somebody else will pick up the slack.". Anyways, this is how I see the Fedora project being positive. I don't see Red Hat backing out of it, because this is where they'll take new directions for future projects and ideas. Every company has something like this going whether it's open source or not. A seeding ground to try out new approaches. We get, development, software, and auto updates free. Compare that against any other distro which you aren't shelling out the green to get. Wade -----Original Message----- From: redhat-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:redhat-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jason Dixon Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 4:31 PM To: Red Hat Mailing List Subject: Re: looking for comments/reactions to the fedora project On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 16:18, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jason Dixon" <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I'm currently evaluating Debian and FreeBSD versus RH Pro > > Workstation for SOHO server use. I've always enjoyed Red Hat's > > products, but they have a way to go to convince me that they're > > interested in keeping the SOHO/small business customer. At least > > with community projects like Debian/*BSD, I don't have to worry that > > their focus will change in the next 12-18 due to shareholder > > pressures. > > Jason, > > I'd be very interested in what you come up with on this. Would you > please post your results when you finish? Well, my thoughts so far: - Debian based distributions, while fun to tinker with, are not a good server solution (IMO). The apt-get package manager, while enjoyable, also is apt (excuse the pun) to get out of hand at times. And Debian/Libranet's strength (tons of software) is also its weakness in the server room... too much choice. It's nice having a distro that's been "professionally" pared down for non-hobbyist/non-desktop usage. - FreeBSD. I'm a big proponent of all things *BSD, but this also falls short in terms of patch management. While it's not a big deal for your average SysAdmin to patch from source, it's not an enviable task to automate. And "build world" is not something your average server farm is going to place faith in. - RHPW. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of this to play with. While I appreciate Ed Wilt's rpm package listing, I note that some of it includes post-install stuff (mysql, for example), so it's hard for me to get a real glimpse of what RH is offering with this product. I still think RH is head-and-shoulders above the competitors for non-hobbyist offerings, it's just going to take some time to get used to their changes. At this time, RHPW or RHWS is still in the lead for server installations. The only thing holding me back from making a formal recommendation to my existing "community"-based clients is RH's indecisions regarding the future of RHPW. *** Please note, the opinions given above are just that... my opinions. I'm not an expert with Debian, so please withhold flames. -- Jason Dixon, RHCE DixonGroup Consulting http://www.dixongroup.net -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
