[ale] Red Hat upgrades?

[Pat Regan]

On Tue, 05 Jul 2011 16:19:36 -0400
"Michael H. Warfield" <mhw at wittsend.com> wrote:

> 1) Fedora is stable.  It's not bleeding edge unless you are on
> Rawhide. That myth is promulgated by people arguing against Fedora.
> Fedora is very much like Ubuntu 6 month.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the concept of using the right tool
for the right job.  I certainly prefer using a faster moving and more
up to date distro on certain servers, like when an application needs a
whole bunch of modern drivers.

Then again, I don't want any surprises on some servers.  I prefer to
barely have to think about my DNS servers for five or six years at a
time :)

> > In RHEL stability and supportability are the main drivers.
> 
> Another myth.  I've already dealt with that.  The main drivers are
> commercial product deliverables.  Put the stability myth in the
> dustbin where it belongs.  You want stability, you got it with Fedora
> if you go -1 on the release version.  RHEL 6 is going to have it's
> amusements and just WHY do you suppose CentOS has not released
> version 6 yet?  Yes, RH made life miserable on Oracle and a couple of
> others but those others included CentOS.  Stability is NOT their main
> objective. 

I'm stuck with CentOS on a handful of my own servers because of
commercial applications.  For the commercial products, I don't really
care which distro they're running on...  Especially since I don't have
that many of them and they don't need a major operating system update
very often.

Pat