Mark Mielke wrote: > ... > I don't buy into this 'companies must give out everything for free, and if > we need support, we'll pay for it'. Organizations given this option, more > often than not, choose not to take the support option for *some* invented > excuse, which usually includes 'well I can't afford the minimum support > package that you offer, but I do wish I had support', or in your case, > 'well I can't afford the minimum support package that you offer, but I do > wish I had the binaries'... I'm afraid that's just a fact of life in the .edu community. As i said, the school i volunteer for can't even afford the RHL basic subscription. > I think it is perfectly reasonable for the open source community to > work on something like Fedora, get Fedora for free (not for free, when > you look at it this way), and leave RHEL for the user base that > requires support and a longer release cycle. My point was that some people need a longer release cycle without support. Here's my explanation of what i'm looking for: http://paulgear.webhop.net/the_page_formerly_known_as_rhel.html Paul
Attachment:
pgpGcQOXf1J88.pgp
Description: PGP signature
