On Fri, 18 Feb 2011, js wrote:
Le 18/02/11 19:39, Johnny Hughes a écrit :
On 02/17/2011 08:34 AM, jean-seb wrote:
theses words are just stupid (sorry, but I'm bored to read stuff like that "if you're unhappy, buy RH and Shut up"):
Ok, so that mean Centos is just a sand box and they should indicate in the web site: "Warning, This projet is just for fun, do not use for production" ???? You cannot, in a side be "an Enterprise-class Linux Distribution" (see http://www.centos.org/) and in the other side said "take source and build your own"; It's important to be coherent .... So if Centos cannot be reactive about security update ... remove the "Enterprise-class" from the web site and be clear about that.
Look ... use CentOS or don't.
Help us test it or don't.
Build your own or don't.
If you don't like it .. don't use it.
You don't understand, I think, the meaning of my email: When someone said "Ok, buy a RH license" to end a discussion and don't talk about problems is just not a good approch. My mail is not (to be clear) against Centos, but against those who use the "do it yourself" just to shutdown all argument :)
Mine too. The same things have been discussd for the past 4 years, and the same arguments have been used. And in 2011 it still takes months to release a new (minor !) release.
More than 2 months have passed since the release of RHEL5.6. Everyone running CentOS 5 did not have security updates for 71 (!) days and counting...
Considering that releases are 6 months apart, 2 months without security updates means CentOS 5 users have no security updates 33% of the time. (Luckily some releases shipped less than 2 months after RHEL !)
Calling me a baby is probably the easiest approach to the problem.
PS Looking back, CentOS 5.3 took 2 months, and CentOS 4.8 even took 3 months to be released. CentOS 6.0 is a new time low with a delay of more than 3 months, but without harming its userbase ;-)