Sun Apr 4 22:05:15 NZST 2004
>>I once saw the command that Debian should rename their "versions"
>>Stable -> Enterprise
>>Testing -> Desktop
>>Unstable -> Developer
>Enterprise doesn't just imply "stability" (More often than not, it doesn't
>imply that at all! Enterprises rarely ever have one machine that does
>anything; failure of any part is fine as long as the cluster stays intact,
>how else do you think you get Windows uptimes longer than security patch
Call it 'production' then, if enterprise isn't the right bit of jargon
for the job. The point of the above comment is that debian stable is
suitable for your internet facing systems. What it doesn't say is that
it's a slow moving beast, and in some cases that's great, and in others
>I feel bad about trusting servers to Fedora; we all moved away from Red Hat
>to Debian once upon a time anyway (hey, it was sold to our resident RHCE!),
>but the dissent is getting louder. I'd love to use White Box Enterprise,
>the SRPM-recompile of RHEL3, but then you get the same "it's as unsupported
>as Debian is" issue.
A lot of the shift from redhat to debian was because of apt. I wouldn't
have moved away if apt-rpm as it is with FC1 existed then. The shift
was also at a time when up2date was in its infancy, and most of us
didn't give it a fair chance. I put up with a stable potato release,
but upgraded to testing (the nascent 3.0 woody release) when I needed
newer packages on my home machine, and on my hosted server when it was
"getting close" to completion (when you no longer had to upgrade glibc
Whats this 'as unsupported as Deban is' issue you speak of? If it's the
standard "who do you sue?" FUD perpetuated by the anti-FOSS types, then
its all a load of crap anyway because for most software you couldn't
"sue" the manufacturer anyway. The click-through license you ignore when
you install most packages means you consent to giving up most of your
rights with respect to damages incurred from use or misuse of their
software, in whatever circumstances they arise.
If you're referring to a paid support network, who uses them anyway? Has
anyone on this list made use of RH's pay-per-view support network, and
have they been satisfied with the response they got? Was it worth what
you paid ? (I'm honestly interested, as I've never paid for support in
this fashion. Any problems I've come across have been solvable with
judicious use of google, friends, and sometimes a small amount of magic)
I guess I'm asking 'Is "it's unsupported" actually that much of a
problem?'. And I don't want to hear "yes, because my boss won't like
it", I'd like to hear some *actual* examples of where it falls through.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the wlug
NOTICE: This is an archive of a public mailing list. The University of Waikato is not responsible for its contents.