[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: We are evaluating building packages from Fedora Extras for RHEL


Paul <paul all-the-johnsons co uk> wrote:

> Again, the problem is not so much if it works and works happily under
> RHEL/CentOS, but the QA/QC expected of a commercial product. Me, I am
> happy to have the no-cost RHEL licence, a copy of the distro and some
> RedHat freebies (come on, there has to be something!), but would be
> looking at some form of indemnification from RH should something get
> through which causes problems for the commercial client. I don't mind
> carrying the can for stuff I do in FE, but would have qualms for the

I second this.
While it is nice to have FE packages available for RHEL (I use kbsingh's
packages myself) it is absolutely clear to me (as an administrator) that
we are talking about two different "classes" of software.

RHEL is supported and comes with guaranteed stability (as far as such things
go with software). The rebuilt FE packages on the other hand have neither
support nor the guaranteed stability. If it breaks, I get to keep all the

This is not a complaint in any way, it is just how things are. And since
I know all this (and decide to use the packages anyway) it is ultimately
my problem if a FE package goes awry on one of my systems. That's the

I do not think that the fedora project in it's current state is able to
maintain software over the same period as a RHEL release. Just think
about where you were, what you were doing and what your plans were seven
years ago.

"Music is the only language in which you cannot say a mean or sarcastic
thing."  -- John Erskine

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]