* Matthew Walburn matt@math.mit.edu [2003-11-04 19:39]:
My situation with RHEL/Fedora is that my company (a large department in an .edu) doesn't need the commercial support of RHEL, we need the release cycle. The fact of the matter is that while we want to go with RHEL department wide, we can't afford it. So, we're being forced into giving Fedora a shot on our workstations, and RHEL ES on our critical servers.
This is my position as well (though a small dept in an .edu, and just me), and from the tone of many comments/emails all over, I think many people's concern.
In short, I think many people are looking for a similar situation to Debian Stable, or FreeBSD RELEASEs(?) where you can just track the security patches, and only need to upgrade at long(er) intervals.
Is it the intention of the Legacy group to essentially enable a similar maintenance/sec/patch schedule to Debian/Stable and FreeBSD?
Of course "well go use those" is an obvious answer, but I think lots of people would like to stick with Redhat... err, Fedora, if possible.
TG