Care to explain? I have serious problems with one-line comments.

Whether that will be true remains to be seen. Fedora Core is expected to provide the base components for Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Don't expect its users to be degraded to guinea pigs. And the Fedora Project has yet to start. Fedora Core 1 will be like Red Hat Linux 10.

Fedora Core is meant to adapt new software and technologies faster than Red Hat Linux. But that can also be a good thing with regard to bug-fix updates. Watch Red Hat's errata pages (http://www.redhat.com/errata). How many bug-fix updates have been released for Red Hat Linux compared with the number of bugs which have been reported? With the Fedora Project, the community can demonstrate interest and influence the stability and usability of the distributed software.

Define "better".

Have you ever before done the security maintenance of a server over a period of five years? Slackware, Debian GNU/Linux and even Red Hat Linux play in a different league than Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

I asked a question "will that make people switch?" and you made it into "why are you going to switch?". Is that hard for you to understand?

I have serious problems with someone with a bad attitude.

[QUOTE][B]Whether that will be true remains to be seen. Fedora Core is expected to provide the base components for Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Don't expect its users to be degraded to guinea pigs. And the Fedora Project has yet to start. Fedora Core 1 will be like Red Hat Linux 10.

Fedora Core is meant to adapt new software and technologies faster than Red Hat Linux. But that can also be a good thing with regard to bug-fix updates. Watch Red Hat's errata pages (http://www.redhat.com/errata). How many bug-fix updates have been released for Red Hat Linux compared with the number of bugs which have been reported? With the Fedora Project, the community can demonstrate interest and influence the stability and usability of the distributed software.


Is the Red Hat Server line goint to get the job done better than other distros?

A lot of companies don't use Red Hat Enterprise Linux and are getting along just fine.

This started with me asking a simple question. Don't turn this into me against Red Hat. You seem to just be trying to pick a fight.

Let me clarify a few things I see in this thread:

- Fedora isn't just a new name. It a total change in release structure.

- Fedora Core will not be the base for RHEL. Some packages will first be testing in Fedora and then make their way into RHEL however.

- Better is a tough word to quantify, but as was noted the official support as far as length and level is much greater in RHEL.

--jeremy

darthtux snuck his reply in while I was typing

Many companies do not need the support that RHEL offers. Some companies that used to be using RHL will likely switch to RHEL now, and just as likely some will switch to other distros (Fedora included).

--jeremy

Again Jeremy, I was asking a QUESTION A concept different from a STATEMENT.

RHEL does have good "official support". My QUESTION is, do small companies with a good admin need this?

Better is relative. So I will rephrase. Does RHEL get the job done and other distros don't?

I like Red Hat. If people have read my posts on this forum they know that. But IF, again IF, Fedora is not going to be good enough to run servers because of its stability, some COMPANIES may choose other distros. That's all I'm saying. I hope Fedora and Red Hat have great success.

darthtux,

I didn't think you were making a statement, I was just clarifying a few things (not all said by you, BTW). To be honest I don't think all companies do need RHEL, atleast not as the current model is structured. I think RedHat realizes this. The next version of RHEL is due to be shipped soon and I would imagine some kind of change will happen that reflects the dropping of RHL. With the release structure initially given I would personally not run Fedora on a critical (or probably any) server. What actually happens with Fedora remains to be seen however.

--jeremy

Well I don't want to be misunderstood. When on a forum you have to choose your words carefully in order not to be misunderstood. I'm still learning that

That's my point. I'm just would like someone, maybe misc, to answer my question, is Fedora going to be stable enough for companies to use?

If I'm not clear enough, all you have to do is ask, no reason to accuse

Thanks for the clarification.

Seems like we're typing over each other. I'm going to sit back and take a break

No one wrote that.

Don't forget that Fedora Core will be release-based and will have a separate development stream. To prepare a stable RHEL release every 12-18 months, stable core components must be prepared in time.

Which -- in my opinion -- was not enough to discuss the pros and cons of Fedora Core. You added a few arguments later.

Message board fights are beyond my time.

With regard to certification, its long release cycle and support period, yes.

As written before, that remains to be seen. Why do you think I should be able to predict how powerful Fedora Legacy (or 3rd party add-ons) will be? It also depends on how those companies would use Fedora Core and how often they have upgraded Red Hat Linux before.

This is how we started.

Thanks for the reply misc. Somewhere We got off on the wrong foot. Let's put that behind us

So is Fedora core going to be the basis for RHEL? In other words is Fedora going to pepare the "stable core components" for RHEL?

Well, I got that from:
--jeremy

Reading the Fedora project objects

http://fedora.redhat.com/about/objectives.html

It looks like it will have promise. It also seems promising for knowegable admins

From the page above one of the objective is:
"Form the basis of Red Hat's commercially supported operating system products.":

Let me take a whack at some of the outstdanding questions.

-Fedora is the proving ground for new technologies, it is and will be the core from which we draw from for RHEL. Red Hat may or may draw individual contributions from it depending on the feature, its demand, its maturity and its impact on other bits

-The retail product was not necessarily our "desktop play" which means two things, one: that pulling this product from retail is not pulling out of the desktop and two: that there will not mean there won't be *any* product in retail from Red Hat. For example: http://www.redhat.com/software/workstation/

-"Stable enough" is relative to the user. The API/ABI is not guaranteed to remain consistent for any set length of time, no errata are guaranteed, there is no reason to believe that something that works today, will work tomorrow. If you are comfortable with installing from ftp, have no ISV stack, run on home built and assembled machines, it may indeed be stable enough. It will be "Stable enough" for developers, testers, and enthusisasts. For most common production roles it will not be. That said, you get out what you put in.

-"Small companies with a good admin" need some baseline, just like big companies with bad admins. So the choice is (as with installing from ftp, or using a distro with no support) how much burden can you afford to bear, and the associated liability, v. what you save or gain by doing so. I would say, anyone running a do-it-yourself distro today, can run Fedora tomorrow.

-Lastly, stability is a duplicitous term. Fedora will run, and be stable as in "not crash a lot". Stability of the core, the apps known to run, associated training is something else, stable as in "predictable deployment, I can plan around for th enext several years". It's not like running Rawhide if that's the fear.

Let me know if there's anything I left out, that others didn't get to.

--jeremy (from Red Hat, not the guy who built this site just to steal my sig)

Thanks Jeremy

--jeremy

BTW, the truth is now out - LQ was indeed started so I could highjack jeremy's sig