[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [K12OSN] k12ltsp release future?



On Sun, 5 Oct 2003, David Trask wrote:

>I'm going to disagree here.  I prefer bleeding edge, but I also understand
>peoples fear of upgrading.  

There is good and bad here.

I think the good outweighs the bad. I'm with David, I think the Fedora
project is going to be good for K12LTSP.

More frequent releases may mean more frequent upgrades, but they are
less likely to be as dramatic as the current upgrades. I would rather
have 3 medium sized upgrades over a 18 month period than 1 huge upgrade
every 18 months. Tools like apt-get, up2date, and yum make it very
easy to do small, incremental upgrades. Most of these small, incremental
package upgrades can be performed on a running server without even
disrupting service.

More frequent upgrades also means more current software. On the server
side, this is can be considered bad. But K12LTSP is primarily used as
a desktop, the desktop software is improving at a blinding pace. I have
upgraded my laptop, my home desktop, and my test K12LTSP server at work
to Fedora core beta 2. Fedora core is definately feels faster and less
"rough" around the edges than RHL 9. The quicker the release cycle
for these improvements, the better.

I can see from my FTP server logs that quite of few people are still
using K12LTSP 2.1.x, so I know that there are a significant number
of K12LTSP users who disagree with me. If it ain't broke, don't fix
it ;-).  The problem I see is that RHL 7.3, which is the base that
K12LTSP 2.1.x is built on, will no longer be supported after December.
I have a couple of servers that are running RHL7.3 as well, so I'm
in the same boat to some degree. There are a number of projects
forming to help support these older systems. It will be interesting
to see how this washes out.

-Eric




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]