Fedora getting some bad reviews

[Collins Richey]

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 13:03:00 -0600 Michael Hipp <Michael at Hipp.com> wrote:

> Collins Richey wrote:
> 
> > If my memory serves me correctly, fedora is using the same philosophy that
> > RH used in the past.  RH releases (at least until very recently) have always
> > needed more time in the oven.  
> 
> In the past that was true of RH in my experience, but since about 7.1 
> their releases have all been very stable. RH9 is terrific. Course, 
> Fedora isn't RH - that's the official line anyway.
> 
> > This is one reason I prefer the gentoo model - incremental releases (that
> > usually aren't too painful) over a long period. Unlike the RH approach,
> > gentoo doesn't mark a new compiler release as stable for common use until
> > most all packages work with the new compiler.
> 
> Yes; there are some definite advantages. Disadvantages too. In theory 
> Fedora is somewhat more geared toward an incremental model (faster 
> releases with incremental updates along the way).
> 
> I suppose we will just have to wait and see what becomes of our favorite 
> distro. Do any of those "alternative" dictionaries say that patience is 
> a four-letter word? :-)
> 

Yeah, and I definitely don't have the four-letter-word it takes to wade through
400+ postings a day on the fedora-users list to keep current!  Silly me, I
thought the gentoo-users group was a firehose.

And the one missing element in RH-centric distros is a common repository of RPMs
for anything outside the core products.  I've gotten spoiled by the gentoo
repository.  Given the size of their CD set, I would presume that SuSE is much
better than RH in this respect.

-- 
Collins Richey - Denver Area
if you fill your heart with regrets of yesterday and the 
worries of tomorrow, you have no today to be thankful for.