On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 02:50 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Rick Stevens wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 19:11 +0100, Adalbert Prokop wrote: > >> Tim Alberts wrote on Tuesday 30 October 2007: > >> > >>> It's certainly not selfish if you want run production servers...it just > >>> prompts the question (yet again), 'is Fedora production quality or just > >>> beta test for Redhat?' > >> You question implies there are only those two options available, which > >> might not be true. In this case your question would be inane. > >> > >> I would neither assume Fedora being RedHat's *beta* playing ground nor > >> would I use it for a server, which I *must* rely on. > >> I use it as my workstation OS and for my home server - I think that was > >> the goal of Fedora and it does it job fair enough. > > > > Actually, Fedora _is_ the beta stuff for RHEL. There is no RHEL beta > > stuff...it's either RHEL or it's Fedora. Example: RHEL5 is essentially > > Fedora Core 6. > > > > Of course, I look more at it as a "technology preview" rather than beta, > > but I'm weird. > > There is in fact a 6 month or so long beta process for RHEL for every > major release and a smaller beta period for minor releases. A recent > update for example, > > http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6512580671.html I didn't realize that. Ok, I stand (sit) corrected. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - Rick Stevens, Principal Engineer rstevens@xxxxxxxxxxxx - - CDN Systems, Internap, Inc. http://www.internap.com - - - - First Law of Work: - - If you can't get it done in the first 24 hours, work nights. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------
