updates

[William Hooper]

Michael Young said:
> On Sat, 2003-08-02 at 20:40, William Hooper wrote:
>> Michael Young said:
>> [snip]
>> > I'm tired of hearing "it's not supported." I didn't ask for "support,"
>> I
>> > just asked why the updates for Severn weren't available from RHN,
>> while
>> > the updates for Taroon are. And, so far, I received an answer from
>> > everyone but a Red Hat employee (well, not everyone, but you get the
>> > point).
>>
>> I think you missed the part when we asked "what updates"?
>
> Hmmm... I think this bothers me the same as "it's not supported." Tell
> me there haven't been any updated packages for the beta release, can
> you?

Have there been absolutely zero?  No.  Have there been many?  No.  Have
they been timely?  No.  As someone else pointed out, betas are for
testing.  Testing a moving target (releasing updates instead of waiting
for the next ISO) is much harder.

>>
>> > I am also concerned that I will not be able to use the remainder of my
>> > subscription on the next release of RHL. That would force me to keep
>> my
>> > systems at RH9, or quit using my entitlements, which will cost me
>> money.
>>
>> As others pointed out your RHN subscription is not tied to either that
>> particular machine or that particular release.  It is based entirely on
>> time.  If you keep your subscription paid up you could continue to use
>> it
>> on every release (note I said release, not beta) that comes out.
>
> With the RHLP, what guarantee do I have that those releases will have
> channels on RHN? "It's a community project, and it's unsupported,"
> remember? I guess if I want the warm fuzzy feeling, I will have to
> purchase RHEL-WS.
>

Unfortunately the FAQ isn't accessible right now, but it was there:
https://listman.redhat.com/archives/rhl-list/2003-July/msg00004.html

"Unsupported" means you have no service level agreement, and no one on
call to help you.  If you need these things, then yes go with RHEL-WS.

>>
>> > I guess I will re-install my "supported" product, quit making an
>> effort
>> > to contribute to the community, and go on about my business...
>>
>> If your main concern is not being able to use your subscription on betas
>> in between releases, then by all means go ahead.  If you are interested
>> in
>> seeing what direction the RHLP is going, and possibly make the next
>> release better, then run the betas.
>>
>> Why don't you just let one of your subscriptions run out and have one
>> machine on the release and one on the newest beta?
>
> Because I don't always run betas, and I like having an entitlement for
> each machine. Not to mention it sends a few $$ a year to Red Hat.

>From that statement, I don't understand you complaint earlier about
"wasting money" because there are no updates in RHN for the beta.

--
William Hooper