On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Gene Delitzoy wrote: > > > Given the track record with redhat of how often upgrades go wrong, and > > the fact that such an upgrade requires more downtime, I think a lot of > > people will worry about that. > > > > Is fedora there to provide a good distro to users, or to exploit users > > to redhat's commercial benefit? > > Is it just me or do others get the sense that some people on this list > feel that the fedora developers owe us a stable, easy to use, easy to > upgrade, rock solid distro? > > Fedora as a community distro is only as good as the community. Indeed, and it should also serve the community as well. This is the point I was attempting to make > Have you tested the upgrade path? Have you donated money, or time in a > meaningful way to make sure fedora has a clear and bug free upgrade > path? > If not then I wouldn't be complaining about the upgrade capabilities. I wasn't complaing about what is there now - that's not important, as fedora is just starting out. I was complaining about the proposed paths - people (and I don't know where they stand in the community) were saying "we can't do that, won't do that, shouldn't have to do that, what's the point?" - I was pointing out the point. As it is, I'd love to contribute to development of the distro, but that'd mean I need a spare machine to do it on, and my financial situation is far from rosy. -- Sam Barnett-Cormack Software Developer | Student of Physics & Maths UK Mirror Service (http://www.mirror.ac.uk) | Lancaster University
