Red Hat "decided" that short innovation cycle + long support cycle are
mutually exclusive about as much as Galileo "decided" that the Earth
orbited the Sun, not the other way around. I just hope that The
Community is as forgiving about our "decision" as The Church was about
Galileo's ;-)
M
On Mon, 2004-09-13 at 09:31, Rex Dieter wrote:
Daniel Roesen wrote:
> No, RHEL has a too long innovation cycle. What I need is something
> like the Fedora release (innovation) cycle, together with a RHEL-like
> support cycle.
And redhat decided that these 2 items, short innovation cycle + long
support cycle, are mutually exclusive. redhat would end up "supporting"
5-6 releases (going back ~3 years @ ~ 6 month innovation cycle), which
would be unmanageable. Is that really what you want?
Besides, IMO, RHEL is pretty good when it comes to innovation too. Are
there features missing from RHEL that you need?
-- Rex