Fedora release lifecyle

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On 12/14/06, Josh Boyer <jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 22:35 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 16:42 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > > Look, lets be honest here.  Fedora isn't all that great of a distro for a
> > > stable server.  We don't do backports, we play with new technology, we've got
> > > a fast paced development cycle, etc...  Lets not try to be something we
> > > aren't.
> >
> > Actually I find that ideal for a mail server. I _want_ to keep Exim,
> > SpamAssassin and ClamAV up to date. All my servers run Fedora.
>
> As do mine.  Fedora as a server is fine for quite a few people and use
> cases.
>

Fedora is a good server operating system where you have control of the
hardware, only have a certain number of servers you are going to
maintain, need cutting edge software, and/or have the staff to upgrade
servers on a 6 month cycle. The reason I say a 6 month cycle is that
for an enterprise it takes about 2-3 months after an OS before it is
usually considered 'known' enough to be put in mass production for
servers/desktops. That leaves about 6 (now 10 months) before you have
to upgrade again. Doing 1-10 servers by yourself is doable. Trying to
do a 500+ servers that some genius thought FC-5 would be perfect on
because it had stuff RHEL-4 didnt.. is a nightmare.



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"