A fair number of those packages made it to RHEL 6 because of the request
of the large paying customers asking for it through support channels
(etc.). Red Hat resisted at first to most of them, and few never maid it
past requests (like python I believe). Others were wighted carefully. If
they are in there, they must be giving good quality increase vs. time delay.
Since RHEL must be in the operation possibly without mayor packege
change for next 7 years, any enhancement now is for me a welcome change.
Beta packages that does not affect other packages can be in beta
state, since their bugs can not manifest on other components, and I am
sure Red Hat first consulted author (and maybe even made financial
contribution to make sure that package gets out of beta stage until
final RHEL release.
If it were any other distro, I would most likely think as you are, but
since I use refreshed CentOS 5 (My knowledge level does not need Red Hat
support) for desktop duty even now, I can very much appreciate Red Hat
forcing newer packages where ever stability is not an issue. Further
more, since I use CentOS and not RHEL itself, I am bound to wait another
2-3 months after RHEL 6.0 final for my distro, and since my Notebook now
runs RHEL 6 Beta 2 exclusively, I can tell you CentOS/RHEL 5.x
shortcomings (very old packages and udev) drive me nuts. But I still do
not want them hurrying the release. I can wait now little longer so I do
not suffer 3-4 years from now.
Ljubomir
Chris Adams wrote:
Once upon a time, Ljubomir Ljubojevic <off...@plnet.rs> said:
Do all of you even realize how many bugs Red Hat has to resolve to move
from Fedora sources to bugs free stable product?? If you even done ANY
programming you would understand how complicated is to solve all the
issues popping all the time.
Yes, I do understand that. But then I look at the differences between
beta1 and beta2 and see some significant version changes (such as
Dovecot jumping from 1.2.9 to 2.0beta8 - a beta version in RHEL?), which
should not be happening after a beta release. That indicates to me poor
project management and the possibility of an even more delayed release
(which may cause additional packages to get upgrades, causing more
delays, etc.), or a rushed release that is not stable.
Now, I'd much prefer to see Dovecot 2.0 in a long-term release like
RHEL, but a change like that should have been made before the first
beta.
What I heard originally was that RHEL 6 was going to be based on Fedora
12, which was released almost a year ago. When the first RHEL 6 beta
was released, there were a fair number of packages that looked to be
based on Fedora 13 instead, which indicates much less testing time (and
throwing away some of the Fedora-based testing, since the package mix
was changed). The second beta upgraded some packages to newer versions
that appear to be based on the Fedora 14 development tree (F14 will
reach beta next week).
_______________________________________________
rhelv6-beta-list mailing list
rhelv6-beta-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-beta-list
