John Summerfied wrote:
Richard Kelsch wrote:
Well, you should read up on what FC is for. It's for testing; if you
don't like the bleeding edge, get off it. Use a RHEL clone (or even
RHEL), or 'drake or SuSe or Ubuntu or something.
I'm running FC3 on a couple of relatively unimportant systems. I'd
not bet my business on it.
Ah, maybe you should read as well. FC4 can't be a very effective
example of bleeding edge in the open source arena if it can't run
open source software without major surgery. Also, who said I was
using it for production or even a business? I am using it as an
appliance, and personal software development machine. Why shouldn't
I use the bleeding edge?
Because you obviously can't cope with the bleeding.
Bleeding I can cope with, otherwise I wouldn't have spent so much time
on it. It's the hemmorraging I can't cope with, nor should anyone
running what is called a "stable release". Sure, it's not intended for
enterprise, but this is the first one that breaks most open source
software out there. That's not cool, nor would it be cool if the
codebase were moved to the RHEL tree. In fact, subscribers would be
dropping like flies.
I use FC4 on my laptop because I don't need that other software and FC4
works out of the box for it. However, my workstation stays at FC3
(after failing FC4 usability). I still stand by my claim that FC4 fails
the intentions of the project. Nevertheless, I know it will be fixed
eventually, perhaps FC5.
Rich
P.S. Why is it always the fanboys that can't cope with anything
negative about their favorite computer OS/software/hardware and feel
they have to insult to satisfy their own pathetic ego, instead of
understand it's constructive criticism that is part of improving the
OS/software/hardware?
