On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 22:18 -0400, David Boles wrote:
Ric Moore wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-06-22 at 05:56 +0000, g wrote:
>
> It might be better to avoid the use of "labels" as much as possible. I
> know it's hard to do in practice. Sadly, I have my share of favorites.
> "Idiot" just rolls off the fingers when typing it. So does
"Twit".
> That's a really good one. "Stupid" gets my hackles up though,
I'll
> battle on that one. <cackles>
>
> Again, it's better to not use them at all. Ric
A sensible person would run CentOS, or RHEL, or one of the many others, for a
server. It would be foolish to run any distro, such as Fedora, there are many
others, in a production type situation. Something that changes as often, as
quickly, and a radically as Fedora does not, would not, be a good choice for a
stable LAN or production system. Only if you want to be cheap and get 'the
free stuff' would it make sense. And then 'they' would have to deal with the
problems.
So tell me Ric. What would you call someone that would do this, described
above? Bob? Fred? Or a fool?
----
I have a problem with this thinking...
1. It presupposes what you are calling a production server.
2. It attaches a negative aspersion to anyone who doesn't agree with
your thinking.
I can think of several scenarios off the top of my head where a Fedora
server would probably be preferable to CentOS/RHEL...
- Thin client server (like LTSP) where I want newer end user
applications.
- Special application server like Ruby on Rails that does things like
image manipulation.
So yes, I do think it's not only possible but sometimes useful if not
necessary to use something a little more bleeding edge than stable as a
server and not at all foolish.
Please stop with the over-arching characterizations that only serve to
further your narrow point of view.
Craig