java again really

[Craig White]

On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 12:49 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> 
> >>> Peter's assertion is surely clear enough, that Fedora does have
> >>> community participation and you can join the development group to help
> >>> guide the packaging, at least to become involved in the process but
> >>> clearly you want this ability without the commitment. Some people choose
> >>> to curse the darkness and some choose to light candles.
> >> I'm not interested in helping a distribution become self-contained and a 
> >> limited subset of what it could be if it simply cooperated with 
> >> independent 3rd parties.
> > ----
> > and the likelihood that you will still be on this list 2 years from now,
> > cursing the same darkness and lighting no candles?
> 
> That depends on what changes, of course. The only way a candle could be 
> lit would be to change policy, which isn't something I can do. My main 
> reasons for caring about fedora at all is that it historically is a 
> preview of what RHEL/Centos will be in the next release and it shares 
> the same administration style.  If their courses continue to diverge in 
> ways like the Sun jvm inclusion in RHEL, jpackage breakage in fedora 
> there won't be a compelling reason to deal with the usability issues. Or 
> if my company finds a better alternative for the server side to replace 
> RHEL/Centos (and we do have someone promoting Suse), then the 
> administrative similarities will no longer be interesting.  But, I sort 
> of expect the same old things to continue and it might be inconvenient 
> to get the support contracts for some software moved over to a different OS.
----
SuSE, Ubuntu offers SLA's

How many systems/entitlements do you manage that have RHEL/WS SLA's
anyway? Perhaps you can get Red Hat's attention.

Craig