Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

http://www.redhat.com/promo/real/

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

What was that you were saying about getting your facts straight?

RHEL is released every two years, Fedora twice a year. We’ve seen 3 releases of RHEL since the beginning of Fedora which is now at its 8th release.

So what was your point again?

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

There are 5 versions of RHEL, and 8 versions of Fedora. What is that about releases being rare again?

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

Some quotations, in case you haven’t read the document:

“RHEL is derived from Fedora every few releases.”
Considering that a new version of RHEL is released very rarely, this underlines exactly what I’ve said about the codebases of both distros.

“Fedora as a platform to promote the development of new technology, some of which might end up in Red Hat Enterprise Linux”
Sounds like testbed to me. It all depends on your definitions. The author of the document says ‘BUT we’re not using _too_new_code_’. That may well be so. Still, comparatively, Fedora IS the most bleeding-edge distro around, and not the best bug-tested.

Security updates for _just_one_year_ is also the lowest among all Linux distributions, further underlining my point that the relation between Fedora and Red Hat is very much like what Roy impudently claimed the relation between openSUSE and Novell to be: one of getting unpaid, outside contributors to work on something that your commercial distribution is feeding on.

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

For crying out loud, stop comaring this to religion, wars, and even “Nazis”. This site is an analysis. Your attempts to muddy the waters won’t work.

It took me about 4 seconds on google to find this.

Is it too much to at least ask you to google, fact-check, research, and come armed before you make comments? (Since this is your biggest “beef” and complaint?)

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraMyths

Roy’s our [satire mode]‘little Bin Ladin’[/ satire mode]. I’m just the man trying to get people to hold their breath and re-consider their own fanatic mindsets.

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

“My guess is that Novell tries to elevate levels of participation in OpenSUSE because that’s the distribution Novell feeds on. It hopes that it can hide in the fog while others do all the labour.”

This describes exactly what Red Hat does with Fedora. Not that it was a bad thing, as everybody working on or using Fedora is conscious ofusing a bleeding-edge distro.

So, to explain in more detail: Fedora was meant to help the development of Red Hat’s codebase with the help of the community. Red Hat uses Fedora (good as it may be) purely as a test-bed, where they can try out new technologies that could prove to be too unstable for RHEL without any risk. Fixes from RHEL don’t go upstream to Fedora because the codecase it too different. Not because of evil intent from Red Hat’s side but just because the enterprise-distro and the bleeding-edge-testing distro are too far apart.

The only part that is really negative about Fedora is that something doesn’t happen before a release that happens before openSUSE-releases: A decided corporate effort at bug-squashing. It doesn’t happen because Red Hat cannot afford to put its complete ressources at de-bugging code that they won’t use for their commercial product anytime soon (while for Novell it makes sense because openSUSE’s code goes back into SLED, soon).

The result is that Fedora is a fine distro but a bit rough around the edges.

About openSUSE-devs not listening to community members, I personally have found them very co-operative when it comes to technical issues (not pseudo-politics). Also, they’ve just founded a board with community-members in it, it will turn into a community-led distribution. Isn’t that what you asked for. But, just a moment, Roy just damned Novell for this as a slick political move. There’s no doing right by fanatatics.

So – if you want a bleeding-edige distro Fedora is the thing for you. If you want more of a compromise between enterprise-distro and bleeding-edige openSUSE is for you.

Calling community developers at openSUSE ‘fools’ certainly doesn’t make you look good, does it?

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

How DARE you, troll? Fedora is more open than openSUSE ever will be, and despite your stupid assertions, Red Hat engineers do work on Fedora. The difference is they don’t act as all-knowing controllers of the distro like some other companies, and actually LISTEN to the community members when they make suggestions and help out with the distro.

On the other hand, I see openSUSE slowly collecting a huge pile of garbage fake “open source” stuff like Moonlight, and I wonder how long it’ll be before the fools contributing realize they’re being abused by Novell at the expense of their own time?

As for you, eet, since I know you’ll be responding to this, no doubt with another attack on me personally, I’d like to ask you why you claim to be a “voice or reason” or somesuch when all you do is attack and/or tell people they should “ignore Microsoft”. Okay, we’ll ignore Microsoft. When they start demanding money or trying to force us developers to work for them for free, then what? Oh, yeah, that won’t happen, right? Got any proof of that, other than vague “Linux is in the Enterprise” claims?

How about starting with the availability of the SLED/S-sources?

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

You know where the sources are, now, go build your SLES-fork yourself!

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll

why there is no Open Source SLES

[...]

One of them is that the SLES community is much smaller and more aimed at proprietary software. Novell itself is promoting Mixed Source and promotes its own proprietary software on top of SLES (also see OES). This obviously scares part of the community away. The deal with Microsoft obviously does as well. As a result Novell is big within Enterprises with little community people, and these are not the kind of people that would spend their free time rebuilding packages and do QA.

Another reason is that Novell is not in favor of such a project (even though people from within Novell _and_ people in the SLES community disagree with management) because it fears it will take away some of the profit and Novell made a big risk by taking the Linux route, they cannot afford to make it fail.

Thinking before writing is also asked too much.

Not slandering is asked too much.

Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll