On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 04:53, John McBride wrote:
I suspect it is as I feared. The rules appear to have changed (fedora
was originally portrayed as being somewhat stable, but over time more
posts are saying it's not suitable for production, only experimentation
stuff or home use).
So, yes, FC2, I suppose, could be declared a less stable distribution
but it's not a minor upgrade (a proverbial point release). To me, FC2
is a dreaded point zero release. But I refuse to condemn the Fedora
Project for moving forward.
This is okay and all, but it leaves me in a tough spot. I'm gonna take
some hits for migrating a bunch of people off RH 8/9 6 mos. ago and now
this product appears to be marketed strictly for experimentation.
I've tried Suse, Slack, Debian, Mandrake...and all had far more problems
than Fedora, in my experience.
I think the real change we need to understand is that the Fedora Project
is just that, a Project that is community supported.
The free lunch is still here, though. Just as many probably did before
with RHL you can continue to do with FC: download it, install it and use
it.
But, with RHL, how did we get support? We paid. But now, you need to
take ownership of supporting it yourself (with your clients paying you)
or you need to find someone to support you. But expect to pay for that
support. Of course, if this is a little too shaky for you on who to
find to support you, then go to what the big vendors are supporting:
purchase RHEL or purchase Suse Enterprise and receive a support contract
if the alternative is too shaky.