[CentOS] Re: CentOS and SL, together?

On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 01:00, Bryan J. Smith  wrote:

> To me, the quality of Fedora Core is no better or no less than Red Hat Linux
> before it.  One thing I _do_ find is that people are making claims on Red Hat
> Linux that were _never_ true.

Here's a classic example: somewhere in the updates of RH 7.2,
the apache DSO module for mod_perl was finally compiled with
the correct options and became usable as shipped so people
running web sites with it no longer had to recompile apache
with mod_perl included statically.  This was also supplied
in the 7.3 release.  Unfortunately it broke again when RH 8.0
moved to apache 2.0 but that's beside the point - or perhaps
it was the beginning of the new era.

What, in fedora, is ever going to be equivalent of that
RH 7.2 -> RH 7.3 transition where features weren't exactly
frozen but there was a focus on getting existing things
right without introducing new problems.  No one here is
interested in SLA's, or we wouldn't be having this discussion
on the mail list of a distribution that doesn't offer them.
We just want a product that mostly works and isn't too
far behind the developers.

> It's not that Red Hat doesn't have its issues or focus.  It's just that
> people need to focus on those details that are actual issues, and not
> invent things.  Like this Red Hat Linux product I never knew existed.

Come on - I would have guessed that you still had some RH 7.3 boxes
in production too.  Or do you only work with companies that will
pay for vendor support on everything?

-- 
  Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com