On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 08:37, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote: --SNIP-- > Would it hurt that much to slow down the release cycle of fedora to match > what RHL used to enjoy? To help ensure that a *WORKING* distro is released? > Every time I steel myself to try a fedora install, I see another 50 messages > on how some other part of the main OS is screwed up, and to go check on > bugzilla to see how to fix it. I think I've finally been convinced to NOT > try FC1 by this list, and to wait and see if FC2 has better quality. When Red Hat finally announced a formal release policy/schedule for RHL, it was "every 4 to 6 months." Fedora Core's "official" release schedule: 2-3 times per year. What is the difference? RHL was not "slower" to release updates (officially). Also, since we only have one release under our belts so far, we do not know what the release schedule will be. After all, look at what just happened to Debian. Their next version was ready to go, and was not affected by their unfortunate event(s), but they put the release on hold, anyway. My point is, we never know for certain what will happen until it is past, right? I know, kinda obvious...but I do not like to just assume everyone is thinking the way that I do. > Don't get me wrong. I loved RHL with an evangelical zeal. I desperately > want to do the same with fedora. But I just don't have the confidence in it > that I did with RHL...not after having subscribed to this list. As others have said so well, this list *is* the (primary) support point for FC. I installed FC on my HP notebook and have not looked back. There have been no instabilities (that I did not cause). YMMV, as always. But I hope you can become comfortable with the change, soon. Good luck. -- Lamont Peterson <lamont@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Instructor Guru Labs <http://www.gurulabs.com/>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
