Arthur Pemberton wrote:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Dmitry Butskoy <buc@odusz.so-cdu.ru> wrote:


Matej Cepl wrote:


b) If anybody is running production servers on Fedora, then worse for
him


Well, how about enthusiasm here?

What should do some previously RedHat-oriented enthusiast, when all the area
for application of his enthusiasm is some "production environment"? Use
RHEL/CentOS anywhere and Fedora on his laptop only? But RHEL/CentOS is far
from the "bleeding edge", hence his enthusiasm just disappear...





I don't understand what you're saying. Why do you need to be
bleeding-edge in your stable environments?



Well, not the "bleeding-edge" literally.

An environment, which is considered stable, can be "untypical". Ie.
"untypical production stable environment".


All the years RHL/Fedora is used at my work, we was compelled (from time
to time) to even port some future versions/features of N+1 distro to the
current N distro. Because the features required for our "untypical"
environment have appeared somewhere closer to the bleeding-edge...



~buc

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 2008-10-10, 14:36 GMT, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
> What should do some previously RedHat-oriented enthusiast, when
> all the area for application of his enthusiasm is some
> "production environment"? Use RHEL/CentOS anywhere and Fedora
> on his laptop only? But RHEL/CentOS is far from the "bleeding
> edge", hence his enthusiasm just disappear...

Think about that and repeat until you get it -- "distro is either
bleeding-edge or stable; tercium non datur".

Matej

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Dmitry Butskoy <buc@odusz.so-cdu.ru> wrote:
> Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Dmitry Butskoy <buc@odusz.so-cdu.ru>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Matej Cepl wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> b) If anybody is running production servers on Fedora, then worse for
>>>> him
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, how about enthusiasm here?
>>>
>>> What should do some previously RedHat-oriented enthusiast, when all the
>>> area
>>> for application of his enthusiasm is some "production environment"? Use
>>> RHEL/CentOS anywhere and Fedora on his laptop only? But RHEL/CentOS is
>>> far
>>> from the "bleeding edge", hence his enthusiasm just disappear...
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I don't understand what you're saying. Why do you need to be
>> bleeding-edge in your stable environments?
>>
>
> Well, not the "bleeding-edge" literally.
>
> An environment, which is considered stable, can be "untypical". Ie.
> "untypical production stable environment".
>
> All the years RHL/Fedora is used at my work, we was compelled (from time to
> time) to even port some future versions/features of N+1 distro to the
> current N distro. Because the features required for our "untypical"
> environment have appeared somewhere closer to the bleeding-edge...


Sounds like you want Centos + Extras then. Or maybe Extras isn't up to
date enough, and some people may need to create a new 'Current' repo
for Centos.

The closest I've come to wanting something "new" in Centos was wanting
a 2.4.3 (or so) Python instead of the 2.4.2 (or so) that comes with
RHEL/Centos. And that was easily avoided.


--
Fedora 9 : sulphur is good for the skin
( www.pembo13.com )

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 10:13:14AM -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>
> Sounds like you want Centos + Extras then. Or maybe Extras isn't up to
> date enough, and some people may need to create a new 'Current' repo
> for Centos.

If you are referring to EPEL with Extras, EPEL should not move faster
than RHEL, and, as far as I can tell, a 'Current' repo for Centos
doesn't exist.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Matej Cepl wrote:

On 2008-10-10, 14:36 GMT, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:

What should do some previously RedHat-oriented enthusiast, when
all the area for application of his enthusiasm is some
"production environment"? Use RHEL/CentOS anywhere and Fedora
on his laptop only? But RHEL/CentOS is far from the "bleeding
edge", hence his enthusiasm just disappear...



Think about that and repeat until you get it -- "distro is either
bleeding-edge or stable; tercium non datur".



Kinda black-white mentality?


~buc

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Arthur Pemberton wrote:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Dmitry Butskoy <buc@odusz.so-cdu.ru> wrote:



An environment, which is considered stable, can be "untypical". Ie.
"untypical production stable environment".

All the years RHL/Fedora is used at my work, we was compelled (from time to
time) to even port some future versions/features of N+1 distro to the
current N distro. Because the features required for our "untypical"
environment have appeared somewhere closer to the bleeding-edge...




Sounds like you want Centos + Extras then.


No.

EPEL (Extras) is not bleeding-edge (AFAIK its policy). And often enough
we need a new version of some non-Extras package (ie. samba, openldap etc.)



~buc

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Once upon a time, Dmitry Butskoy <buc@odusz.so-cdu.ru> said:
> I would prefer that Fedora would be stable enough, thus does not require
> "continually rebuilding systems"

It isn't just an issue of stability; it is an issue of long-term
support. Fedora does not have the manpower and/or interest to support
releases for a long time (as seen by the failure of the Fedora Legacy
project). The goal of Fedora is to get new features and technology in
the hands of developers as fast as practical, so there are two releases
a year. There are people interested in long-term support, but not
enough to make it happen.

If Fedora tried to support a release for even 3 years, that would be 6
different releases to support, which would require a large investment in
time, additional infrastructure (to handle up to 3 times as many active
packages), etc. Would it be nice if that happened? Sure, but the
demand does not magically produce the manpower to make it so.

That's part of why people pay Red Hat for RHEL: Red Hat does support a
release for years (7 or 8 IIRC now). Basically, Red Hat takes a
snapshot of Fedora, reduces it to a core set of packages they think they
can support (both now and long-term), runs it through some additional
QA, and produces a RHEL release. CentOS then takes the source to that
RHEL release and rebuilds it to produce a compatible free release. Red
Hat does much of the "heavy lifting" involved in supporting a release
for a long time and CentOS has their own infrastructure to support it
for free uses.

Since Fedora releases are only supported for about 1 year, servers on
the Internet running Fedora need to upgraded at least that often. There
are a lot of servers supporting the Fedora infrastructure, and it would
be a significant amount of work to upgrade them all every year. So it
makes sense to use RHEL and/or CentOS (which are after all derived from
Fedora) on the infrastructure servers, so the limited support manpower
can spend time doing more productive things than just upgrading servers.

--
Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Friday 10 October 2008 10:13:57 Jon Stanley wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Dmitry Butskoy <buc@odusz.so-cdu.ru> wrote:
[...]
> > Fedora Desktop "all the time"? (Maybe RedHat employees of them are
> > compelled to use RHEL Desktop in basic working hours?)
>
> I'm not a Red Hat employee, but I'm pretty sure that they aren't
> "compelled" to do anything.

That would be correct.

> And lots of developers that I know run
> rawhide all the time.

Yep. My IBM ThinkPad T61 laptop, which I use for 99% of my $dayjob desktop use
(docked on a ThinkPad Advanced Dock) is running rawhide. I've got several
development boxes here in the office that are a mix of the latest RHEL and
latest rawhide, as I have both package and kernel work to do on both. Some of
'em have both rawhide and RHEL installs too.

On the home front, my personal web and mail server is still lagging behind on
Fedora 9, but will get upgraded soon (yes, I consider running Fedora 9 to be
lagging behind . My mythtv boxes, my tinkering desktop system at home, my
Acer Aspire One netbook and my AppleTV, all running rawhide as well.

Also, taking off my Red Hat hat and speaking purely from a personal point of
view, I'd echo the sentiment that CentOS pretty much *is* Fedora LTS for those
that want such a thing.

--
Jarod Wilson
jarod@redhat.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 05:10:29PM +0200, Matej Cepl wrote:
> On 2008-10-10, 14:36 GMT, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
> > What should do some previously RedHat-oriented enthusiast, when
> > all the area for application of his enthusiasm is some
> > "production environment"? Use RHEL/CentOS anywhere and Fedora
> > on his laptop only? But RHEL/CentOS is far from the "bleeding
> > edge", hence his enthusiasm just disappear...
>
> Think about that and repeat until you get it -- "distro is either
> bleeding-edge or stable; tercium non datur".

It is a bit more complicated. A distro may begin its life bleeding edge
and become stable as time goes by, if it is still maintained. And a
stable distro may have parts that are bleeding-edge. This is not
necessarily easy to implement, but these scenarios certainly have
merits.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Patrice Dumas wrote:

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 05:10:29PM +0200, Matej Cepl wrote:

On 2008-10-10, 14:36 GMT, Dmitry Butskoy wrote:
What should do some previously RedHat-oriented enthusiast, when
all the area for application of his enthusiasm is some
"production environment"? Use RHEL/CentOS anywhere and Fedora
on his laptop only? But RHEL/CentOS is far from the "bleeding
edge", hence his enthusiasm just disappear...
Think about that and repeat until you get it -- "distro is either
bleeding-edge or stable; tercium non datur".


It is a bit more complicated. A distro may begin its life bleeding edge
and become stable as time goes by, if it is still maintained. And a
stable distro may have parts that are bleeding-edge. This is not
necessarily easy to implement, but these scenarios certainly have
merits.


That was the way things worked when redhat developed its popularity. An
X.0 release was approximately as unstable as a fedora, but as it
updated to X.2 or X.3 it would have become very stable and people who
started a development cycle with the early versions could keep the same
OS in production as it matured. What we need for the same effect now is
for the versions of fedora that provide the initial RHEL cuts to offer a
seamless update to the subsequent matching CentOS, repointing to its
update repositories for continued support.


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list