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

Re: Fedora philosophy (was ATI video comes out of the closet)



Les Mikesell wrote:
> Ed Greshko wrote:
> 
>>>> I would disagree about bleeding edge - Fedora tries to be current Which
>>>> is what people were asking for at the time and still do so: very
>>>> loudly.
>>> Are there _really_ that many people asking for major changes in the
>>> kernel to be done in mid-rev of a distro?  Or are people actually just
>>> asking for current userland apps and perhaps drivers for new sata
>>> controllers and the like?
>>
>> [Very large snip]
>>
>> I'm having a bit of a difficult time following this particular topic. 
>> Too
>> many people responding with "sound bites" to other people's "sound
>> bites".
>>
>> I think, as I believe I heard you say, CentOS 3.x and Red Hat 7.3 work
>> perfectly fine for you and that you've no particular reason to
>> update.  Yet,
>> you have a bone to pick with Fedora...which you have tried using but
>> doesn't
>> meet your needs.  Some may question why you would waste your time
>> trying to
>> do so it when what you are running fits your needs...but I suppose
>> that is a
>> different matter.
> 
> Quick recap: on the server side, RHEL (and thus Centos) is just fine,
> because the relevant server applications (apache, sendmail, named,
> dhcpd, etc.) were feature-complete ages ago and all they need to do is
> just keep running, following the same standards as when they were
> installed. The side effect of having old application versions as the
> price of keeping a reliable kernel isn't a big problem there.
> 
> On the desktop side the opposite is true because the applications are
> still evolving rapidly. So, when the distribution ties the same policies
> to the kernel and apps, the price of a machine that you can trust to
> keep working is applications that suck (RHEL,Centos) and to get current
> apps (fedora) you have to take a wildly experimental kernel.
> 
>> What I think would be helpful would be for you to list what you feel
>> are the
>> goals of the Fedora Project and why/how the Project has failed to meet up
>> with those goals.
> 
> To put it bluntly, I think the goal of the Fedora Project is to make a
> system stable enough to use _only_ during the last few months before a
> release of RHEL is cut.  I haven't actually gone back through the
> archives to check, but from memory I'll bet you find virtually no
> instances of messages saying "my xxxx hardware doesn't work" or "my
> machine won't boot" after updates during the relevant times in the FC3
> and FC6 releases.  Everything was sweetness and light for those short
> periods of time.  Then the FC5 and F7 releases came, along with a return
> to the "this doesn't work any more" messages which match my own
> experience.   I realize that most of the breakage comes from the
> upstream kernel, but the distro packagers know how to deal with it when
> it matters to them.
> 
>> I think that would help, at least me, understand what point(s) you are
>> trying to make.
> 
> What I'd like to see is a distribution suitable for replacing MS windows
> on most desktops and I think between RHEL and fedora, all of the parts
> are available but no suitable product exists because to get the current
> applications in fedora you have to take the unstable kernel that comes
> with it (most of the time).   Anyone who has deployed fedora on desktops
> in a large enterprise, accepts the updates and has never had problems
> please feel free to jump in and contradict me - I'd love to be proven
> wrong here, but even FC6 recently pushed an update kernel that wouldn't
> boot on some pretty mainstream Dell and IBM machines with scsi controllers.

I'm pretty much OK with your summary...except for the last paragraph.  I
don't feel the intention/target of the Fedora Project was/is "Deployment in
a large enterprise".  If that is one of the intentions, I would like to know
where it is stated.



-- 
X-rated movies are all alike ... the only thing they leave to the
imagination is the plot.


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