Fedora Makes a Terrible Server?

[Les Mikesell]

Tim Alberts wrote:
> 
> Unfortunately, everything that is beneficial about Fedora comes with the 
> price of 'not quite as well tested' status as RedHat or CentOS.
> 
> Honestly I feel like a backstabber by using CentOS because I've been 
> with Fedora since before Fedora (RedHat 5.1 was my first Linux 
> experience), and using CentOS is reaping the benefits with no contribution.

If you go back that far, you should realize that fedora is approximately 
like the old RH X.0 releases (X from 4 to 7) and Centos is like the old 
RH X.2 or X.3 releases (free download of the tested and more stable 
releases).  The numbering scheme is just different now.  The 
for-pay-only RHEL is the part that diverged from the old scheme.

> Is there a way for Fedora to deal with more of the bugs before releasing 
> and still remain a free distribution?  I don't know how.  If they do 
> manage to do this, what would be the point of paying for RedHat?

You aren't supposed to be paying for the software in RHEL, you pay for 
the support service.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com