Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
And here I thought tinkering was the point of Fedora.
And perhaps the only point.
Are you under
the mistaken impression that Fedora is supposed to be a stable,
mainstream desktop distribution?
No, I was under the impression that it was the development towards the
next RHEL release. As it has been through FC1->RHEL3, FC3->RHEL4,
FC6->RHEL6 with almost no surprises, almost replicating the old
X.0->X.2[->X.3] progressions. But I don't see current changes that make
sense for a future EL.
If you chose a distribution with a quick version turnover, and you
expect "long, smooth transitions", there is something wrong with
your judgment. Or are you trying to say that ALL Linux distributions
should strive for stability above all else?
No, I'm saying that to produce something usable, the development cycles
should have infrequent big discrete jumps, followed by fixing all of the
things that these inevitably break, and this time needs to overlap with
everyone adjusting the applications they run to the changes.
> You keep complaining
that Fedora is not meeting your goals. Did you ever stop and think
that maybe that is because the goals of the Fedora community are not
the same as your goals? Fedora seams to be meeting a lot of people's
goals.
Where are people using fedora? How many?
So if these are not your goals, maybe you should look
elsewhere for a distribution that meats your goals, instead of
beating your head ageist the wall trying to change the goals of the
rest of us?
Basically I'm just wondering out loud where the next server distribution
is going to come from.
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
