On Fri, July 16, 2004 12:30 am, John McBride said: > Actually if you look at the perception of FC on the web, rather than just > RTFM on fedora, you will see that a lot of criticism is being levied > along the lines of what I've said from the beginning...that FC was > originally marketed as something of a "RH9 replacement", a suitable > "desktop" machine, etc...but there is a lot of grumbling about the > rapidfire releases, esp. when it appears that an update set would serve > just as well. Fedora was never marketed as anything but what it has become. Its good that people are discussing it and its ok that many will rightly decide its not the distribution for them. For many people though, Fedora will be a good choice. > When I say "marketed", I mean that a lot of people were asking how FC > stacked up against RH9, especially for home use. For the most part, FC > was discussed as being a suitable replacement. Discussed by who? The goals of the project have been made pretty clear from the start. > A true community project would probably ask the user base for comments > regarding the release schedule, but maybe I'd better not go there. A true community project can take many forms. The Fedora community has been very well defined by RedHat from the start. Nobody ever pretended that the community was defined as everyone who ran RHL. If that had been the intent there would have been no reason to change anything and Fedora could have been released as RHL 10. > That's fine if you want to direct me to the FM and claim that's the one > and only story, but my gut feeling (shared by a lot of other FC users on > the web) is that things *have changed*. Increasingly, the perception is > getting out that FC is a hacker's distro...a sandbox for buggy code. > That's really different! People think a lot of things. It doesn't mean that the goals of the project should be changed. For those who "get it" everything is going along just fine and as expected. For those who have a situation where Fedora isn't appropriate, there are lots of alternatives. There is no way Fedora will ever be the right choice for everyone. > RTFM messages can't make that go away. RHEL is just too complex for my > needs...and for now I have to buy this stuff out of my pocket. That will > change if I can convince enough people to switch, but right now I can't > fork out a couple grand to RH. RHEL may not be the right choice for you either. Have you looked at RedHats other offerings like RedHat Desktop or Professional workstation? > I hope RedHat decides to again make a traditional boxed set with free > updates and some way of having a private update server, like I'm doing > with rsync and yum. They may go back to that someday but for now they've embarked in a new direction that will hopefully make them a more profitable company. They continue to give back to the open source community in many ways. > Thanks for your input, though. I'm guessing I'll wait for FC3 and hold on > to that for as long as possible, then hopefully I'll have the leverage to > get funding for RHEL. >From your earlier post it really sounds like Fedora is not the best choice for your situation. At least not if you want to upgrade all your machines every time there is a new release. That sounds like a lot of work and risk. Cheers, Sean
