Where are we going? (Not a rant)

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 12/07/2012 04:59 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 16:47 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> On 12/07/2012 03:51 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2012-12-07 at 15:40 +0100, Caterpillar wrote:
>>>> The unique and most impotant negative feedback I had it when I
>>>> upgraded a system from Fedora 14 to 15, that was the upgrade from
>>>> Gnome 2 to Gnome 3.
>>>> …
>>>> Fedora community should test big transitions like Gnome 2->3 for a
>>>> longer period of time
>>> FWIW if it was running Fedora 14 and the user was content with it, I
>>> probably wouldn't have upgraded to Fedora 15. You could have waited 6
>>> months and gone straight to Fedora 16. GNOME 3 was a bit better by then.
>>>
>>> I upgrade my *own* machines fairly aggressively — this box has been
>>> running Fedora 18 since August 31st for example. But I don't necessarily
>>> upgrade everyone's machine to *every* Fedora release.
>> I know one *nix gray beard that is still running F9 on his workstation
>> because it's setup just the way he likes it and it works for him.
>>
>> He does not have the time to spare both from work/coding and his
>> personal life to spend hours to setup his system or constantly having to
>> upgrade/re-install fighting and patching whatever nuance that release
>> brings, distracting him from doing actual real work and says that's for
>> GNU/Linux kids, he rather spend that time with his grankids.
>>
>> His upgrade cycle is tied to the life cycle of his hw...
> He should have chosen to install RHEL/CentOS/etc... then.

That's your opinion

>
> Staying on F9 as a developer is a questionable stance.

Not if you know what your are doing

>
> Your machine is full of security issues and you could be compromised and
> become a proxy to compromise the projects you are working on.
>
> If you choose to stay on an older machine you should at least install an
> OS that gets security updates for a lot longer.

Oh I mentioned that to him and suggested the same as you are proposing 
and his response was those that are concern with security are those that 
don't know how to prevent it.

Given that he made his living punching hole in paper couple of decades 
ago I know he either back ported relevant patches or fixed it himself if 
it concerned him cursing modern coders which throw more hw at the 
problem instead of fixing it while he was at it ( which he did few time 
when I was working with him ).

He never changed anything ( afaik still does not ) only for the sake of 
change so it's not like he's against upgrading the machine and does not 
see the need for doing so once in a while but there just really has to 
be a real reason for it to happen.

If I would have started arguing with him about it, it was going to be a 
fight I would have definitely lost and I would have simply been laying 
there, on his office floor knockout by the entire history of unix or 
that stack of punch cards from back in the day he had on his desk...

JBG