RH 9.0

[Chris Sparks]

Hi Phil,

I can appreciate where you are coming from, however, I don't have the 
luxury or time to download
files every day to keep up with a stable version of FC 1.  From what I 
see here FC 1 should have
waited 6 months before release to work out the kinks that we seem to be 
having.

I have applications that I need to run on FC 1 and they don't.  Either 
linking problems or assembly
problems.  I just want to start with something more stable that is all.  
And besides I did pay for someone
to ship me FC 1 so I am not completely taking.

Chris

Randal, Phil wrote:

>That'll do you till the end of April 2004, and then what?
>
>You could instead stay with FC1, feeding back problem reports to the
>developers, so that when FC2 comes out in April it will be a better product.
>
>Open Source is about give and take, not just take.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Phil
>
>---------------------------------------------
>Phil Randal
>Network Engineer
>Herefordshire Council
>Hereford, UK 
>
>  
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: fedora-list-admin at redhat.com
>>[mailto:fedora-list-admin at redhat.com]On Behalf Of Chris Sparks
>>Sent: 19 December 2003 00:50
>>To: fedora-list at redhat.com
>>Subject: Re: RH 9.0
>>
>>
>>Hi everyone,
>>
>>I have been considering going back to RH 9.0 since Fedora is too 
>>volatile to work with.
>>Is there any technical problems with 9.0 that I need to be aware of?
>>
>>Chris
>>
>>
>>--
>>fedora-list mailing list
>>fedora-list at redhat.com
>>To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>--
>fedora-list mailing list
>fedora-list at redhat.com
>To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>
>
>  
>