Re: Fedora Makes a Terrible Server?
Tim Alberts wrote:
Unfortunately, everything that is beneficial about Fedora comes with the
price of 'not quite as well tested' status as RedHat or CentOS.
Honestly I feel like a backstabber by using CentOS because I've been
with Fedora since before Fedora (RedHat 5.1 was my first Linux
experience), and using CentOS is reaping the benefits with no contribution.
If you go back that far, you should realize that fedora is approximately
like the old RH X.0 releases (X from 4 to 7) and Centos is like the old
RH X.2 or X.3 releases (free download of the tested and more stable
releases). The numbering scheme is just different now. The
for-pay-only RHEL is the part that diverged from the old scheme.
Is there a way for Fedora to deal with more of the bugs before
releasing
and still remain a free distribution? I don't know how. If they do
manage to do this, what would be the point of paying for RedHat?
You aren't supposed to be paying for the software in RHEL, you pay for
the support service.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell(a)gmail.com