On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 2:11 PM, David Evans <dev...@gurulabs.com> wrote:
> I found your email unnecessarily judgmental regarding my trimmed quote, so > I'm leaving out the quote and rephrasing the part of my email you objected > to. > So ... i nstead of focusing on the technical specifics of the points I made (and clarified) ... this is now going to turn into a meta-discussion of how I was ... allegedly judgmental? Others can look up both reference. > > I agree with your first email. > > I think Red Hat and SUSE provide good points of reference for determining > exam coverage, but they are not the only distributions. > > That's what I meant. > _All_ distros are 99% similar, all standing on the shoulders of giants in the Upstream, at the mercy of a lot of Upstream developments for the more leading-edge adoption of new technologies. The only question is how long these technologies are supported. So ... let's try this ... because obviously any time someone says Red Hat(R) or SuSE AG(TM), or RHEL or SLES, something seems to happen that causes the technical specifics to be lost. ;) Let's look at 4 distros labeled Brand D, R, S and U. The lifecycles of the distros are as follows ... Brand D = At least 3 years Brand R = At least 10 years, +3 optional Brand S = At least 10 years, +3 optional Brand U = At least 5 years So as a good benchmark, the lifecycles of Brands R and S are at least 10 years. This means ... After Technology 1 is adopted by various Brands over its initial 1-3 years, it still be in Brand R and S distros for another 10 years. And even trying to off-set by 3 years between distros, by year 7-8 in Brand R and S, we're going to know what Brand D and U have done by year 5. So ... If the legacy Brand R and S distros are dropping it, it's very likely Brand D and U are or have already dropped it. So in that case, a "good rule of thumb" on "old technology" is if it's still in Brand R and S distros up to 6 years old. Again, as I said before, _exceptions_ may still exist, even if _rare_. But if there is a question if something is still in use, let's look at if Brand R and S have dropped it. Because if they have, it's extremely likely Brand D and U have already too. If not, that would be an exception. > Even Matt agreed, that's "a good starting point." Because lot of debates over the years here have focused on if something should be dropped. And in the overwhelming majority of cases, they shouldn't, because it still in a Red Hat or SuSE distro that is less than 5 years old, and still in that "Phase/Production 1" lifecycle where it's being actively fixed and enhanced. Even if it's 6-8 years old in the Upstream. > The point in your second email would have been better made if you had > asked for clarification to ensure you hadn't been misunderstood. > The fact that you quoted me as saying only, from the very middle of my post, with 0 context and just a phrase, not even the full sentence ... "We look at RHEL and SLES distros" That itself could be construed by some as "judgmental" by yourself in the first placed. You went off and made the point how Debian and Ubuntu LTS "also had some relevance." You completely took my statement and made it say as if I was ignoring them. So ... next time I'll be sure to use a generic statement, so the "alarm bells" that seem to go off in some peoples' heads whenever Red Hat and/or SuSE is mentioned. Because I'm _not_ arguing that "only Enterprise Linux distros matter." It's that I'm merely pointing out Enterprise Linux distros tend to continue to ship, backport and support some really, really, really _old_ stuff, well after other distros have dropped them. So they are a good "benchmark" to start with. That's all. ;) -- Another very "twisted" bjs ;)
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list lpi-examdev@lpi.org http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
