<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 5:39 AM, David Woodhouse <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dwmw2@infradead.org">dwmw2@infradead.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 12:03 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:<br>
> The CentOS project, or it's upstream, has a release cycle of approximately<br>
> three years -not a steady release cycle of three years but that's what it<br>
> turns out to be. This disqualifies the distribution(s) as desktop Linux<br>
> distributions, as desktops tend to need to run the latest and greatest for<br>
> as far the latest and greatest lets them.<br>
><br>
> Does that make sense?<br>
<br>
</div>As a standalone observation, perhaps -- some desktop users often don't<br>
want old, stagnant code; they'd prefer the latest bells and whistles.<br>
<br>
But it makes no sense when considered in conjunction with your apparent<br>
desire for an old, stagnant version of Fedora.<br>
<br>
What makes you think it would be any different?<br>
<br>
It's not exactly difficult or problematic to update from one version of<br>
Fedora to the next. I do it on each of my servers at least once a year<br>
(I usually skip a release, but not always). And those are mostly<br>
headless, remote boxes.<br>
<br>
If you want new stuff, run Fedora and do a fairly painless update<br>
annually. If you want old stuff, run Centos and update less frequently.<br>
<br>
I don't see any need for a middle ground.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre<br>
<a href="mailto:David.Woodhouse@intel.com">David.Woodhouse@intel.com</a> Intel Corporation<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
--<br>
fedora-devel-list mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:fedora-devel-list@redhat.com">fedora-devel-list@redhat.com</a><br>
<a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all">Out of curiosity, don't we have an Extended Life Cycle Fedora version called Red Hat Enterprise Linux and/or CentOS and/or dozens of other similar distros?<br><br>Why duplicate efforts? Just so it goes under the name "Fedora"?<br>
-- <br>Ing. Juan M. Rodriguez Moreno<br>Desarrollador de Sistemas Abiertos<br>Sitio: <a href="http://proyectofedora.org/mexico">http://proyectofedora.org/mexico</a><br><br><br>