Re: Bring back configurability in expert mode

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 01:25:39PM -0400, Douglas Stewart wrote:
> 
>  From what I've gathered, the split between rhlp and rhel is one of 
> support, namely: corporate customers desire active support on a RedHat 
> product, they can invest in RHEL.  If they don't care about support and 
> are comfortable performing their own maintenance, they're free to use 
> RHLP.  Am I right so far?

There are other differences between RHL and RHEL as well, such as
features and release cycle length.

But yes, RHL has no support whatsoever.

> So, if that's the case, then (while I see your points), I think the 
> issues raised by RedHat employees are bunk.  RH isn't going to be 
> "supporting" RHLP.  There's no expectation of such.  The calls RH 
> support desk employees will be fielding will be from RHEL users only 
> (correct?).  And, since it's been admitted that RHEL is similar to, yet 
> not exactly the same as the intended RHLP distro, then what's the 
> problem?  Leave the dummy installer in RHEL and give those who want the 
> "expert" mode exactly what they want in RHLP's installer.

I would say yes in general RHL can have a lot of stuff in it that we
aren't expecting to support.

However the issue isn't total bunk since Jeremy does have to maintain
the installer, and there's a limit to how much cruft can go in there.
He also gets bugzilla reports etc.

Some months ago I posted this document on my personal web site:
 http://ometer.com/features.html

Basically, it's important to realize that "why not?" isn't a reason to
add stuff, there needs to be an analysis of "why" - if only for simple
sanity of the codebase.

(Note, I wrote the above document in a totally non-Red-Hat context.)

I agree with you that phone support in itself isn't an issue, or
perhaps is an issue only to the extent that the same code will land in
RHEL eventually.

Havoc