"Fedora Core 6 was released on the 24th, not the 24th of December, but the 24th of October. I can't remember who said that on the Fedora IRC channel, but for him a new Fedora release was a bit like Christmas." More here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-12-18
If you have users still using FC4, they would have to step up and contribute. Fedora Legacy is volunteer based.
Of course many bugs would closed as fixed in the development tree. Do you think any distribution pushes all its fixes into a stable branch as an update. That is precisely what would destabilise it.
Fedora is now a robust system with a relatively shorter lifecycle and that means that it is not for everyone. There is no qualms about that. Use something else that fits your need. There is no need to track something only to bash it.
Do you want to know how many people use it production? Just ask sourceforge.net wikipedia Disney etc etc. You are one who is spreading FUD here.
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-October/msg03138.ht...
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2006-October/msg00...
Edited 2006-10-28 05:39
Member since:2005-07-24
"""If you have users still using FC4, they would have to step up and contribute. Fedora Legacy is volunteer based."""
It seems there are no volunteers left. No updates for any of their claimed supported releases since July.
"""Of course many bugs would closed as fixed in the development tree. Do you think any distribution pushes all its fixes into a stable branch as an update."""
If it's broken, it's broken. You can't really hurt it any more. I know very well that there are fixes that RHEL (and consequently, CentOS) do not push into the release until the next quarterly update.
They do it out of concern for stability. They also keep the same package versions for 18-24 months.
With Fedora, we're talking about a distro that has no problem with pushing out upgrages to the next version of the package (as nightly updates) because it's the most expedient way to fix security problems... which they almost *have* to address during the 9-10 month period in which they claim to support the release.
"""Fedora is now a robust system with a relatively shorter lifecycle and that means that it is not for everyone."""
That's putting it politely. Fedora is relatively *not* robust with a not so relatively short life-cycle.
What production applications do you support under Fedora and how many of your clients depend upon it?
I simply wish that well meaning persons would stop trying to claim FC is production quality when it isn't.
And don't you think that your playing the FUD card was a bit cheap?
Edited 2006-10-28 06:20
Member since:2005-07-06
kernel.org uses Fedora FYI.
I tried to install Fedora 6 in a Virtual PC 2004 SP1 session. When it starts the graphical installer, the graphics are all screwed up.
Tried to start installer with linux resolution=1024x768, same thing. I expected more than that from Fedora, but I'm not really surprised.
Have you tried the text mode instead and submit a bug report about graphical issue on Virtual PC?
Edited 2006-10-28 07:38
Member since:
2005-07-24
When you get right down to it, what really matters is the performance in the field. I have users that are still on FC4. (On machines on firewalled networks only, since FC4 no longer has any support whatsoever: http://lwn.net/Articles/204722/ )
I have moved most of my clients to CentOS. (Most are on 4.4.) But I'm currently evaluating FC6. So I have a pretty good comparison view of the two distros.
Putting all that together with what I've read of the positions of RH and the Fedora guys, I would say that RH is willing to fund an alpha. (Think: "Eats your Brane!
The developers want to be able to call it production quality, so they go an extra mile. (Kudos!)
And the end result is about beta quality.
My gripe is not so much with the beta quality, as it is with people trying to claim that it is production quality when it isn't.
This really goes beyond just the number of bugs upon release. It extends to how those bugs are treated. How many bugs on bugzilla ever get a response? How many are resolved? How many end up "fixed in rawhide"?
Plus, as the above lwn.net link shows, Fedory Legacy... isn't relevant. There is no tangible support for Fedora Releases after they are "handed off" to Fedora Legacy.
Fedora has its strengths. But it would be better if everyone would just let Fedora be Fedora and not try to claim that it is something that it is not.
Edited 2006-10-28 04:54