Re: long term support release

[Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 freenet de>]

On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 00:41 +0100, Matej Cepl wrote:
> On 2008-01-24, 18:11 GMT, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > How can I? If I'd buy RHEL, I wouldn't want to use CentOS, if 
> > I were using CentOS I wouldn't want to use RHEL.
> 
> It might be your case,
Yes. I have a university/research/engineering (EE/CS/IT) background,
where flexibility/openness of the source-code and costs of the OS are
the key points for choosing Linux (If choosing it at all!).

>  but there are many RH customers who have 
> RHEL for some mission-critical applications (or for the software, 
> where they need supported platform -- ehm, ehm, Oracle),
Mission-critical is relative to the "mission" a system is deployed for.

I wouldn't choose Linux to control a spacecraft or a nuclear power
plant, but I didn't hesitate to chose Linux to control robots in a lab,
nor do I hesitate to chose Fedora to host "my personal mission's"
mission-critical data" ;)

Of cause you are aiming at "big-businesses" combining deploying an OS
with larger engineering tasks over longer time-frames (bookkeeping,
billing, shop-systems etc.). True, that's not my domain ;)

>  but rest 
> of their server needs are covered by CentOS.
Well, are you saying "CentOS + some engineering" aren't suitable for
"mission-critical" purposes? How would that be different from using
RHEL? 
OK, somebody else mentioned ISO9000 and other certifications, ...
probably relevant in some cases, but probably irrelevant in many others.

Ralf