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

Re: [Fedora] Re: FC1 stable, FC2 ... you wish.

On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 07:27, Andy Green wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> On Tuesday 08 June 2004 14:41, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Jun 2004, Craig White wrote:
> > > - it ain't a bug if it isn't in bugzilla.
> Yeah, it might not get addressed if it ain't in Bugzilla, but it's a bug as 
> soon as someone is burning time on it.
I didn't make the saying up...I've seen it repeatedly from redhat.com
> I myself was defending FC2 on an unrelated 
> board, it was selinux, the 2.6 transition, etc,  and was depressed to find 
> that the latest SuSE is 2.6 and not exhibiting the kinds of problems we see 
> in FC2 - plus you can do wild, cutting edge stuff like plug a USB stick or 
> camera in it out of the box and it does something.
All that glitters is not gold but it might be interesting to give SuSE a
> OTOH there is this increasingly obvious tension between what an actual 
> community project might do and motivations driven by servicing Enterprise 
> (eg, the focus on selinux?)
One of the liabilities of any Linux distro is whether the distro is put
out by a 'for-profit' corporation or not. Red Hat is obviously sensitive
to their stockholders and must derive a profit at the end of the day so
their motives are clearly revenue driven.

Debian is entirely opposite, entirely community supported and no
corporate enterprise to control the direction.

There is no one best answer for everyone. 


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