----- Mensagem original ----
De: Jim Nanney <jnanney mscoast com>
Para: For discussions about marketing and expanding the Fedora user base <fedora-marketing-list redhat com>
Enviadas: Quarta-feira, 24 de Outubro de 2007 2:25:11
Assunto: Re: Res: Fedora Life Cycle
PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I think the point of life cycle vs release cycle is getting confused
here. Fedora has a release cycle of 6 months. That means a new
is released every 6 months. Support for the previous version (along
with updates) are not stopped at 6 months, but rather at 13 months.
While this certainly can be daunting, I regularly update my OS every
other release (on my server at least). This allows my server to
maintain a single distribution for 1 year and gives me one month to
the new release and apply it.
Mapping a OS upgrade path prior to rollout should be part of that
process. If the upgrade path cannot sustain a 13 month lifecycle (not
month as per releases, but 13 month as per updates maintained), then
yes, CentOS or RHEL may be the correct path to take.
The big confusion here seems to be release cycle vs life cycle.
Life cycle is how long the distribution is supported with updates.
Release cycle is how long before the next version is released.
Henrique de Castro wrote:
> The fundamental point about the discussion which says on fedora´s
> cycle isn´t just the fact that Fedora has a short 6 month cycle and
> just like that as some of the present colleagues have clearly
> A lot of people love Fedora and dedicate much of their time to make
> better and to spread it to increase its instalation basis (even here,
> Brazil´s remote caverns). To me and to much more people, Fedora is
> just a Linux distribution with which we work, it is a personal thing
> to be part of it´s expansion is a reason for pride.
> Obviously a Fedora´s fan wish to use it for any day-to-day tasks: it
> powerfull, stable, reliable and solid, but when the subject is critic
> mission servers, the short cycle ends on a harmfull point. On such
> cases, any upgrade is considered high risk and I´m sure that you all
> agree with that. To use CentOS or Red Hat is a good choice, but
> not the point; It isn´t the case to search alternatives, but to have
> work one of the best distributions on the world and have to,
> unfortunately, give it up for great risk tasks where long cycles are
> better fit.
> Do not forget that the people who make the Fedora team immense,
> and incomparably competent also has people around the world,
> Brazil´s cavern men, who abdicate days off, nights and even college
> class time for love (as well as everyone here) to Fedora.
> Henrique "LonelySpooky" Junior
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Fedora-marketing-list mailing listFedora-marketing-list redhat comhttps://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list