Fedora Core brevity vs server upgrades

[John Summerfied]

Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 16:06, Marc M wrote:
> 
>>I am curious as to what some of you guys say to Debian snobs who look
>>down on Fedora/RH as being less stable.  I find that a pretty esoteric
>>argument/to each their own, but how do you counter that sort of
>>statement or attitude?  
> 
> 
> I'd ask them to explain the Debian release schedule.  My take on it
> is that what they call stable is not what you want to run - and if
> you run something that isn't in stable, it is your fault, not theirs
> if it has problems.

Oh, the Debian release schedule is pretty simple. It's released when 
it's ready.

_nothing_ in Debian is secret, just browse www.debian.org for all the 
information about packages (there are lots), standards, bugs, help fo 
users, help for developers and the fine command of language which they 
use to describe each other as needs arise. And their insistance on 
freedom and the deficiencies in the GFDL.

To see what Debian could be, see www.ubuntu.com. Canonical sponsors 
Ubuntu, and the Ubuntu release schedule is simple too. April and 
October. This year, next year.... Its first release had Gnome 2.8 when 
Sarge had 2.6.

Or mephis, but I don't have a link atm.

-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa at computerdatasafe.com.au  Z1aaaaaaa at computerdatasafe.com.au
Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/