How stable is fedora?

Rodolfo J. Paiz rpaiz at
Mon May 17 23:24:37 UTC 2004

At 13:00 5/17/2004, Mike Bartman wrote:
>At 11:37 AM 5/10/04 -0700, Sean Kennedy wrote:
> >This is exactly the problem with fc1 in a production enviroment.  The
> >fact that it becomes unsupported so fast, as far as patches are
> >concerned.
>FC1 has the right software [...] but if support for
>keeping it secure is going to go away, and require an upgrade to a new
>version every few months, it's not going to cut it either.

Why is it that people don't listen, and keep saying the same mistake over 
and over again? Please, repeat after me:

         1. Fedora Core releases are supposed to be made 2 or 3 times per 
year. From FC1 to FC2 took 6.5 months and was one hell of a schedule, so 
more than twice a year is bloody well unlikely. Twice a year is exactly the 
release cycle Red Hat Linux had.

         2. Red Hat cannot support OS versions for five years without 
sufficient revenue, based on past experience of doing it that way for 
*years*. So FC1 has support for approximately three months after FC2 is 
released, and so on.

         3. Fedora Legacy intends to provide continued support (security 
patches mostly) for FC1 through three release cycles. That is until the 
release of FC5, roughly an additional 15-18 months.

         4. At the very least, you can easily count on starting to use FC2 
tomorrow, getting patches direct from Fedora Project for about 9 months, 
then using Fedora Legacy for just four months or so and going straight to 
FC4. But you might be able to stick with Fedora Legacy until the release of 
FC6 if FL achieves their objectives.

Which part of this is too unstable or too fast-changing for you?

Rodolfo J. Paiz
rpaiz at

More information about the fedora-list mailing list