Chris Jones wrote:
I mean that as opposed to having logical reasons or evidence to back
them up.
What exactly needs 'proving' ? Fedora have decided, for better or worse,
to take the path they have. They don't need to justify that choice to
anyway. Whether they get (or keep) any users is justification enough.
It doesn't 'need' proving - but without proof it's fair to call it
religion or a cult and maintain an appropriate distance.
To whatever extent this fragments the installed base and makes it
difficult for 3rd party software to run across the variations it works
against the general acceptability of Linux and hurts everyone. We are
just continuing the old unix flavor wars that gave Microsoft an easy
monopoly and ensuring that things can't change.
Anti-septic hurts, but in the long run it helps cure problems.
They said that about blood-letting too.
Fedora (I
believe) are promoting what in the long term is the right way to go
(IMHO). Time will tell if it is truly the correct approach(/treatment).
It's been more than a decade now (if you count fedora as an extension of
the earlier RH model) and it just continues to help the monopoly make
more money. Doesn't someone define insanity as expecting different
results from continuing to do the same thing?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
