Rick Stevens wrote:
> Fedora is, by definition, bleeding edge.
Ralf Corsepius:
No, Fedora is not supposed to the bleeding edge. It's supposed to
be the
cutting edge, with some occasional warts sometimes.
I would say, by way of what it actually is, it is bleeding edge. But
you're arguing over pedantics.
The Fedora website may, now, say what /they/ want Fedora to be. People
who've been using it since it used to be called Red Hat Linux, know what
it is. I'm fairly sure I've seen Red Hat describe it similarly, way
back in the beginning, or at least I know I've seen the computer print
media say so (i.e. those who review different computer systems).
It's clear that we are a test bed, whether that be Red Hat pushing
things to be tested into it, themselves, or they're just looking at what
Fedora users put into it. You can see that from what goes into Fedora
ends up on Red Hat's Linux.
That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it gets tiring to see some
people running around with their hands over their ears, "la la laaing,"
so they don't hear it.
And it can't possibly be considered as a general purpose distro, it's
just too unattractive to the casual user. The release turnover time is
way too fast, and it doesn't support encumbered products (MP3, graphics
card drivers, etc.) without technical tinkering to add it in.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64
All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is no point
trying to privately email me, I will only read messages posted to the
public lists.
George Orwell's '1984' was supposed to be a warning against tyranny, not
a set of instructions for supposedly democratic governments.