On Mon, 2007-11-12 at 00:52 -0800, Kam Leo wrote: > On Nov 10, 2007 12:52 AM, Gilboa Davara <gilboad@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, 2007-11-10 at 10:41 +0200, Gilboa Davara wrote: > > > On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 07:32 -0800, Serguei Miridonov wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > I have some remarks about Fedora lifetime and stability which > > > > are very important for general users. Now and in the past > > > > there were some issues with Fedora upgrades which turned life > > > > into nightmare when instead of doing normal work users had to > > > > fight with bugs, sending reports, waiting fixes, etc. > > > > > > > > I think that it might be a good idea to increase the time > > > > between Fedora releases and/or make the lifetime of every > > > > release at least 2-3 years. > > > > > > > > However, before starting a discussion about this I would like > > > > to ask, if this topic was discussed earlier. I'm sure it was > > > > but can somebody point me any deep analysis which really > > > > proves that current one year lifetime and half-year release > > > > period is the best for Fedora? > > > > > > > > Thank you in advance. > > > > > > > > Serguei. > > > > > > > > > > No deep analysis required: > > > Short term support (1 year), bleeding edge: Fedora. > > > Long term support (7 years), slow moving: RHEL (and CentOS). > > > > > > - Gilboa > > > > Let me try and explain myself. > > You cannot have a stable platform that is also bleeding edge. > > As any software developer can tell you, software needs time to mature. > > You need time to check everything, fix bugs, fix compatibility problems, > > etc. > > > > Ubuntu long term support is problematic. You get a semi-unstable release > > that is slowly being stabilized as things progress. But until it fully > > stabilizes, the software packages being used as just as old as > > RHEL/CentOS ones. > > Why do you say long term support is problematic? Per their web page > 18 months is the standard support term for the desktop and server > releases. Plus they offer special long term support (LTS ) releases; > desktop (3 years) and server (5 years). They're all free and under one > umbrella. That beats the heck out of what Fedora/Red Hat is offering. > (I'm not counting CentOS as a free Red Hat supported offering.) Because the release itself is semi-stable to begin with. Yes, you get 18/36/60 month support cycle - but unlike RHEL/CentOS it doesn't have a long term beta/staging program. (AKA Fedora) > > > ... In essence, instead of having RedHat/CentOS do the QA for you (or > > use Fedora to pre-test it), you are being used as Ubuntu's QA > > It's a community QA for the bulk of the software. GNU software, Gnome, > KDE, Openoffice, etc. are all from the same place. > True. But if I use RHEL or CentOS in a production environment, I already know that it has went through a long QA cycle, both as Fedora and as RHEL beta/RC/etc. - Gilboa
