The RHEL whitepaper (http://www.redhat.com/whitepapers/rhel/ASESWS_Family_Overview.pdf) describes
the release cycle as 12-18 months. And in any case, they certainly don't say that this makes their
product obsolete. Quite the opposite. Not including the latest version of everything does not make
something obsolete in the enterprise market. I don't want to start a big argument here, but I do
think it's worth pointing out that distinction.
In the interest of full-disclosure I should point out that I work for Red Hat, which is why my
information is RH-specific, but I think it's similar with SuSE and I think/hope you'll find that
many linux-using organizations agree: As long as the system stays patched for security and bug
fixes, 'tried and true' is better than the latest, software-wise.
--Brad
--- Frank Roberts - SOTL <sotl155360@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > Are you saying that RH, Suse, etc's Enterprise products only release
> > updates every 2-3 years? If so, I think you're mistaken, but I don't want
> > to launch into a big explaination if I 've just misunderstood you.
> >
> > Short version: The reason (for example) Red Hat Adv Server looks like RH
> > 7.2 is because it is an enhanced version of the distribution based on
> > software that has been around the block long enough to have had all the
> > kinks worked out. Bug fixes, security fixes and feature updates are
> > released regularly, though, so it stays up to date in all the ways that
> > count.
> >
> > --Brad
>
> No I am not saying that. They are.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:58:15 EDT