[CentOS] Dag's comment at linuxtag

[Bogdan Nicolescu]

----- Original Message ----

> From: R P Herrold <herrold at centos.org>
> To: CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org>
> Sent: Friday, July 3, 2009 8:51:35 PM
> Subject: [CentOS] Dag's comment at linuxtag
> 
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, Bogdan Nicolescu wrote:
> 
> > BUT... when someone from the Centos team makes a statement 
> > like "...latest release has many up-to-date desktop 
> > packages..."
> 
> ummm -- it is of course true that changes happen; rebasings do 
> as well; and the CentOS project [and the upstream] document 
> these matters in release notes as to the up-to-date changes 
> done.  Upstream decided on most of them, or we made a minimal 
> delta to get the packageset to stabilize.  So what?  The 
> project cannot cater to people who won't read nor pay 
> attention.
> 

Russ, this was about a comment about "up-to-date desktop packages", not a comment about "up-to-date changes".  Just because the release notes contains "up-to-date changes", it doesn't necessarily mean that the "up-to-date xxx package" is installed.  But maybe I wrong, please point to one current "up-to-date package" in Centos or RH for that matter.  And by up-to-date package I don't mean a stable, but un-supported package (ie PHP)


> > I think a lot of users will start looking for alternatives.
> 
> 'a lot?' ... we disagree
> 

Are you disagreeing with the number (a lot) of users who use Centos because they need/want an RH clone,  or/and are you disagreeing with the number (a lot) of users who would leave Centos if Centos breaks RH compatibility?

It should be easy to find out.  Conduct a poll.  

> That said: Choice is good -- keeping an eye on options is 
> good.  So what?
> 

Choice is good and somtimes overrated, but stability is always better.

> Straining at gnats and worrying about scope creep by CentOS in 
> 'base' and 'updates' is a wasted effort, so long as one 
> remains in those archives.  As I said before, 'no-one forces 
> you to use any third party repository'

Thank you, and all the other Centos members for clarifying this... "Yes, CentOS is often considered a server operating system," explained
Dag, "but we are trying to change that. In fact, the latest release has
many up-to-date desktop packages and we also have an extra repository
with many application and drivers that are not officially part of Red
Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)."  

And keep up the good work.

bn