Fedora *is* for servers! [was Re: Need advice]

[Bill Oliver]

On Fri, 18 Apr 2014, Matthew Miller wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 11:40:00PM -0400, Digimer wrote:
>>> We are developing internal software using MySql dB and are planning to
>>> use Fedora for the server.
>> Please don't do that. Fedora is awesome, but it's a desktop OS, not
>> a server OS. The life cycle is way to short and it's not hardened
>
> This is not true. Please stop repeating it. Fedora is not a desktop-only OS,
> and can be (and *is*) used in many serious server contexts, even in
> production. You need to know what you're getting into and be willing to cope
> with the 13-month lifecycle and community support model, but it's a
> perfectly awesome fit for many uses, including possibly this one.
>
> For more, see the Fedora Server Working Group:
> <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server>


Well, any linux OS is an awesome fit for anything if you are "willing to cope" with whatever the hassle factor is for that OS.  The point is that it *is* a hassle, not that it's one that can't be overcome with enough effort.

That's not a criticism of the short life cycle of Fedora, by the way.  It's just that Fedora is a *different product.*  I don't consider that a bad thing, it just means that Fedora is better at some things and CentOS/RHEL is better at others.  I'm not sure that Fedora is made better were it to try to be more like CentOS/RHEL and have a long life cycle.  RHEL/CentOS is good at being RHEL/CentOS, and Fedora is good at being Fedora.

Saying that you can use Fedora as a stable server is a little like saying that you can haul a couch in the back of a Prius -- if you are willing to deal with the hassles of tying it down and wedging it in.  You can, but it's simpler and easier to throw it in the back of of your brother's pick-up and be done with it.


billo