On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 11:36 -0400, Brunner, Brian T. wrote: > centos-bounces at centos.org wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 11:23 -0400, Brunner, Brian T. wrote: > >> centos-bounces at centos.org wrote: > >>> On 7.4.2011 16:58, Les Mikesell wrote: > >>> > >>> This sounds as if RH is responsible for not yet released CentOS 6 ? > >>> What did I miss ? What changes do you talking about ? > >> > >> AIUI: In previous releases, RH distributed source + patches. > >> Starting > >> 6.0 RH releases patched source. This makes backing out a patch, or > >> backporting patches from future development in Fedora (e.g.) far > >> more nightmarish than before. > >> > >> Also AIUI, it appears the (undisclosed) RH build environment changed > >> significantly, such that generating bit-for-bit identical binaries (a > >> CentOS objective) requires mind-reading RH folks by CentOS folks (aka > >> reverse-engineering the undisclosed RH build environment). > >> > >> These two square wheels make the CentOS wagon a bit slower than > >> before. > > > > I would appreciate an answer to one related question. > > > > Will CentOS release CentOS 6.0 as a production release? > > > > I see three possible answers: yes/no/TBD. > > Answer 4: > This is not just an answer of > "yes it's a production release" > it's > "production releases are all that CentOS ever does." Appreciate the clarification. I had thought that like SL, there would have been a CentOS 6 beta. From my searches, it appears that I was mistaken, there is no --public-- (or private?) CentOS 6 beta. Thanks, Mike