Fedora vs RedHat

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 21:54 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> Chris Tyler wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2008-11-02 at 20:41 -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>>> I would certainly find Fedora more useful if it got security fixes for a year 
>>>> instead of six months.
>>> Fedora gets security fixes and updates for two releases + 1 month, or
>>> about 13 months total.
>> But read the list of bug fixes in the updates to understand why you 
>> really don't want to upgrade anything important until after about 6 
>> months after a release.
> ----
> for S & G's, name a new release OS of any type, FLOSS or proprietary
> that you felt comfortable jumping all over with 'anything important'
> before it had 6 months under it's belt.
> 

CentOS has been solid from day 1, at least for versions 3, 4, and 5.  Of 
course by the time it gets released there has been some time for RHEL to 
have pushed updates for anything drastically wrong, and RHEL is pretty 
well tested before release anyway.  But, even if you hold off 6 months 
while testing your own apps on the new OS and working out ways to take 
advantage of any new features, you still have 6 1/2 years of update 
support life left with RHEL/Centos.  With fedora, by the time you might 
trust a release the update support is almost over.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com