On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Albert Graham <agraham(a)g-b.net> wrote:
You get out of it what you put in it, this guy clearly could not be
bothered to look into issues that he was having or why things had
changed - which is called progress.
If something "changes" and that change breaks something badly should
it be called progress?
I have installed hundreds of servers using Fedora and I have to say
I've
had very few problems, kernel issues are not really the fault of the
Fedora team, sometimes you hit quirks but these do get sorted out.
If you haven't already, go read the fedora-list or fedora-devel
archives on the 2.6.24 kernel.
I find the path / progress and choices Fedora makes are
"natural
progression" and indeed ahead of the pack.
I find that a opinion is just an opinion.
this guy should be using RHEL if he does not want anything to
change.
So RHEL is the only way someone might want to have a desktop linux
that can in some capacity act as a server. Noted.
Does not want to break is independent of does not want to change.
My 2c.
Which is probably the same value as the rant on that webpage.
-Mauriat