On 29/12/14 01:52, Always Learning wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-12-18 at 10:30 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > >> .............. The design changes are done in Fedora, by >> people who apparently never liked unix or consistency, not the people >> using Red Hat or CentOS that already have things working that they >> would like to keep working the same way across upgrades. > > What type of large commercial organisation lets undisciplined people > make adverse changes detrimental to the reputation and ultimate success > of its 'stable' commercial product. Since Enterprise Linux is supposed > NOT to be Windoze, consistency is very important especially for the > paying (R.H.) customers. It is also much appreciated by its devout fans > and the hardworking guardians of the Centos cloned version. > > * The dramatic upheaval in C7; > * The claimed life-span of C5 truncated by no more normal upgrades; > * The changes introduced in C6.6, during the lifetime of an allegedly > stable C6 product; > > all seem to suggest Upstream lacks a clear, reliable and dependable > strategic policy (or what some call a 'sense of direction'). > > Happy New Year to all to everyone. > The stability comes _within_ a product release. I don't think it's realistic to expect el7 to be the same as el6 or el5, otherwsie what's the point of the newer releases. You have 7 years of support / consistency (now 10 years). What business model do you have that you can't build around a product guaranteed to be consistent/supported for the next 10 years?