Johnny Hughes wrote: >On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 21:33 +0200, Dominik Składanowski wrote: > > >>Hello list. >> >>I've just read this news (http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=02638) - in >>my opinion very good idea. What do you think? >> >> >> > >I was looking at that :) > >Question is ... does it really serve a purpose? > > > Well, from my perspective as a user, what I was looking for when I found CentOS was not a LiveCD, but RHEL without the service contract. One of the reasons for that was that Fedora Legacy started off with big plans. We're gonna support RH7.3 and RH8.0 and RH9 forever, and we're gonna support, FC1, and FC2, etc. on a 1,2,3, out basis. That's ambitious. They finally gave up on RH8.0 but are still holding onto 7.3, 9, FC1, FC2. And as of now, any honest observer would have to say that the only currently supported distro is FC3, and that by the Fedora community and not Fedora-legacy. Fedora-legacy was too ambitious and everyone suffered. The last updates for FC2 are from Apr 7. The last for the other versions came out on Feb 27. Now, of course, in the open-source world, people work on what they want to work on, and its really nobody else's business. But as a user, I would as soon see CentOS focus on being a great RHEL clone, and the core essentials of providing quick and reliable updates and long term support. If the CentOS team started spreading themselves too thin I, and I'm sure others, would start to worry. CentOS is about faith in ongoing support. Not about maintaining live CD's. Leave that to Knoppix, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc. -Steve Bergman