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

Re: CNET News Article



On Wed, 22 Oct 2003, Bill Rugolsky Jr. wrote:

>> Huh?  How is this ANY different from ANY previous release of Red 
>> Hat Linux in any way?  Red Hat Linux beta releases have ALWAYS 
>> been created from a snapshot of Rawhide.  That is by definition, 
>> what a Beta is in the first place.
>
>I know.  (Been using RH since 4.2.)  I think that you mistook
>my praise for criticism.

Sorry, I understood you ok, I was more commenting on what the 
article was saying...  it just appeared directed at you, but was 
directed to the not-present-person who you were paraphrasing.  
;o)
 

>> Absolutely nothing has changed in this respect whatsoever, other 
>> than that hundreds and hundreds of people have for years now 
>> requested that rawhide be also available via RHN, and now we've 
>> made it also available via RHN.
>
>And that was my point.  In previous betas, we'd duly install from
>the isos, selectively updating packages that were of special interest
>to us, or especially broken, by grabbing the latest from Rawhide (and
>endure the dependency horrors that that sometimes entailed).
>
>This time around, with yum repositories, and now up2date, keeping up
>with rawhide was trivial, and as a consequence, I'm guessing that many
>more people did so.  My point was that running the most bleeding-edge
>configuration available was remarkably stable throughout the beta
>series.

I agree, I was more preaching to the choir, of whom you are part
of, rather than disagreeing with you.  ;o)  It just didn't come 
out that way perhaps.


>So I think we are in vigorous agreement: kudos to Red Hat engineering!

Thanks, agreed.  ;o)


-- 
Mike A. Harris     ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris
OS Systems Engineer - XFree86 maintainer - Red Hat




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