I guess this e-mail is a long time in coming. Please understand I have the utmost and sincerest respect for everyone's hard work, but it's time to ask some tough questions. First off, I want to point out this 2004Sep19 post to Fedora-Devel: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2004-September/msg00879.html So where is this announce list? Or is there a discussion list? Or is the traffic part of fedora-devel now (I assume not)? Secondly, while Fedora Extras packages have yet to be released for Fedora Core 3, I could not even do an "apt-get dist-upgrade" as various APT index files are seemingly lacking from the Fedora.US site just for the "OS" (Fedora Core) portions (hoping the existing set of Fedora Extras for Fedora Core 2 would suffice, since FC2 and FC3 are pretty much "ABI compatible"). So, is APT distribution now being deprecated for Fedora? Or should Fedora.US be considered basically "off-limits" for Fedora Core 3 right now. [ I know I could built my own APT repository, and solve the issue, which I might. ] Lastly, can someone detail the changes in the rollout of Fedora Extras packages for Fedora Core 3? I would very much like to better understand the new release management for Fedora Extras. As a major proponent of proper lifecycle and configuration management, I can not only understand, but even appreciate delays in such release. So I don't mind waiting at all, but would like to understand the changes in Fedora Extras for Fedora Core 3. Thanx for fielding these questions in advance. I will continue to truly appreciate all the hard work of Red Hat and Fedora volunteers. -- Bryan J. Smith General Annoyance P.S. And not to throw any bigotry into the questions, hence why this is a "P.S.," but I haven't seen a good explanation on why YUM is getting preference over APT in current Red Hat Fedora moves? I heavily prefer APT for various reasons, and would like to understand what advantages of YUM I am missing? -- Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx -------------------------------------------------------------------- Subtotal Cost of Ownership (SCO) for Windows being less than Linux Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) assumes experts for the former, costly retraining for the latter, omitted "software assurance" costs in compatible desktop OS/apps for the former, no free/legacy reuse for latter, and no basic security, patch or downtime comparison at all.
