On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 04:20 -0600, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 11/10/2011 07:40 PM, Craig White wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 14:30 -0500, Lamar Owen wrote: > >> On Thursday, November 10, 2011 02:20:25 PM Bob Hoffman wrote: > >>> The newer stuff is cool, but it lacks the polish of a ready to go > >>> system. Centos has the polish, but lacks the new stuff. > >>> sigh. > >> > >> And right there is the core (or maybe it's 'sore') point to all of this; > >> it really depends on what you need and how much work you have to do to > >> make it fit your needs. And then keeping up with your needs, as they > >> inevitably change. > >> > >> CentOS is what it is: as close as possible to upstream EL without being > >> upstream EL. Nothing more, nothing less, and bug-for-bug compatible. If > >> that's not what you need, then CentOS won't meet your need. > > ---- > > close? > > > > May 19, 2011 (RH 6.1) > > > > I thought the term 'close' only applied to horseshoes and hand grenades. > > > > Given the track record for CentOS for v 6, it's pretty clear that > > installing it means that you are likely to have deployed servers that > > will lag for months without security updates and it's awful easy to set > > up iptables ;-) I'm not saying this to disparage the developers > > because I'm sure that they're doing the best that they can but I can't > > tell my friends/clients/employer/etc. that I can recommend using CentOS > > knowing the struggles they are having getting out releases & updates. > > > > This is just no longer true Craig ... you obviously have not been > looking at or using the CR for CentOS-6. ---- correct, not from lack of desire though.
I was dying to try out FreeIPA but the target is continually moving. Even at the point where I can install 6.1 FreeIPA is whole on 6.2 ---- > > We have also now totally automated many parts of the QA system to test > packages. > > http://wiki.centos.org/QaWiki/AutomatedTests/WritingTests/t_functional > > Also, I would like an audit of your servers that you manage to see how > often you install those security updates that ARE available. How fast > are you pushing all the updates that you are getting SO QUICKLY with > these other OS's? ---- I'm not sure why you decided to go here when Russ made it so clear that this was off-topic so I will defer an answer ---- > I can only tell you that we are cranking out packages at a very quick > pace now, and that they are also now being tested much better and much > faster than before. > > We are also asking for "the community" to help us be designing tests > that can be used in t_functional ... have YOU designed any tests to > ensure that a problem that you have had in the past does not sneak in > anymore and put it in t_functional ... or are you just here to > continually complain and run down our OS? ---- If that's how you see it - then so be it. I would suppose it would be unnecessary to re-quote your own thoughts on timeliness of security updates on another list but certainly relevant. I don't see myself 'running down' CentOS at all but noting that installing CentOS 6.0 on a public facing server requires a leap of faith that I don't currently have. Perhaps it is useful that not everyone is patiently waiting for releases, updates and parroting 'good job' when it is 6+ months behind upstream. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
