Another distribution?? But why?

[gboyce at badbelly.com]

I don't believe that the Fedora project itself isn't really usable for
anyone who's looking to support a large number of machines without having
to completely upgrade them every 4-6 months since that's the projected 
life cycle of the project.

There has been talk about a fedora legacy project that will provide 
extended support beyond that length of time, but right now I'm not willing 
to bet my time and the companies money on an unproven project working 
out.  If the fedora legacy stuff gets dropped, then we're in a bad 
situation.

Maybe when Fedora Core 2 is released, and the extended support of Fedora
Core 1 is a proven thing.

On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, miah wrote:

> and don't forget people, fedora is a OPEN SOURCE COMMUNITY PROJECT, if you want to work on a distro, work on that... building a distro is alot of work.
> 
> -miah
> 
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:40:20PM -0500, Grant Young wrote:
> > And now for the curmudgeonly view: 
> > 
> > Ugh... Another distribution???  
> > 
> > While I'm disappointed with Red Hat's decision to pull out of the
> > low-end distribution market I'd have to say that the effort to make it
> > work they put in was way out of whack with the return they saw.  The
> > main reason to use Red Hat was to have the brand name and possibility of
> > paid support behind it.  
> > 
> > Trying to roll yet another distribution won't bring back the brand name
> > support that gives comfort to the PHBs giving the go ahead for Linux. 
> > If they're willing to shell out just buy the Red Hat offering.  The cost
> > is still relatively insignificant to their bottom line.  If they won't
> > or can't afford it just pick some other existing distribution like Suse
> > or Debian or Gentoo that fulfills your philosophical bent and technical
> > needs.  The maintainers of the those distros will appreciate the
> > support.  This is my personal view.  One of the great things I love
> > about Linux and Open Source is the freedom to do stuff like rolling your
> > own distribution.  It's just not my cup of tea.
> > 
> > I haven't personally used the Linux-Athena distribution but I did have
> > experience trying to use the earlier Athena versions with non-Athenized
> > applications (like Oracle) and it was pretty much a disaster.  Project
> > Athena solves the workstation application and file server maintenance
> > problem for MIT very, very well and their programmers do an amazing job
> > keeping things up to date.  The thing that makes Athena work well is its
> > elegantly engineered rigidity.  But in my experience the tweaks and
> > improvements they put in for their environment usually mess up services
> > and interfaces expected by many applications.  YMMV.
> > 
> > On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 11:47, Derek Atkins wrote:
> > > "Anand Rao" <andy at honnu.com> writes:
> > > 
> > > > I am in for it. I feel this will is a great  great Idea  Ready to help this
> > > > project.
> > > 
> > > For what it's worth, you may want to look at what MIT is doing with
> > > "Linux-Athena".  It (currently) a Red Hat based distribution with an
> > > automatic (push/pull) update system which allows centralized control
> > > of lots of workstations with similar configuration.
> > > 
> > > -derek
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss at blu.org
> > http://www.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at blu.org
> http://www.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>