On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:56:30PM -0600, Hubert Bahr wrote:
Painful is fedora, but hardware/new apps with 5 not filling the void. Upstream recognizes the loss to other vendors so released 6.0 well before 5.6 although 5.6 is much easier.
I will give you the hardware edge here as it's a valid argument; but the I still maintain that most "modern" userland functionality can be had by appropriate use of third-party vetted repos.
Agreed but updates full fill the major majority of the needs for the current installs. I never advocated dropping 5 just keeping the release order in the same sequence as upstream.
C6 is already quite late, for various definitions of "late"; moving it back however much more to get 5.6 dealt with and out the door and off the dev's plates isn't going to make or break it for most I wouldn't think. Speaking for myself, I want 5.6 and have little use for 6 at the present time. 5.6+security rollups is a much higher priority for myself and my clients.
This statement was asinine since nobody expects systems "satisfied" by C5 to switch. But do not expect those dissatisfied by C5 to wait while you switch the release order of the upstream vendor.
Those that aren't satisfied are free to purchase appropriate upstream entitlements :)
John