Re: Red Hat's acquisition of Sistina Software (LVM) (December18th 2003)

On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 05:55:59PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-01-09 at 14:52, Zate wrote:
> > Arjan van de Ven said:
> > > On Fri, 2004-01-09 at 08:55, ilja.lunev-//[email protected] wrote:
> > >> Sorry,
> > >> this was my mistake. I mean RHEL2.1
> > >
> > > well RHEL2.1 doesn't have LVM at all, and it's unlikely we'll ever add it
> > > (it's basically a feature frozen product, esp now that RHEL3 is out for a
> > > while, with LVM even)
> > >
> > If RHEL3 is your flag ship you might want to talk to some of your 
> > "partners" about providing drivers/support for it.  Ie Compaq.
> > 
> > You freeze 2.1 and throw out 3 which not everyone has full support for
> > yet.  
> 
> Maybe you should think of this some: if we HADN'T frozen 2.1 at release
> time but kept changing it like crazy, the vendors who's software you
> require wouldn't have bothered to provide their stuff for a moving
> target.

Isn't a 2.1 release without frozen features just Fedora?  

Seriously, the reason we pay the support dollars we do is because the
features have been frozen, stable, and therefore supportable.  You can't
become truly stable without having some level of feature freeze.

2.1 was frozen for new features.  It was not frozen for bugfixes.
Similarly, RHEL 3 is now frozen for features as we've seen for requests
for things like an OpenOffice 1.1 update.  That's part of the tradeoffs
we make when we standardize on RHEL instead of Fedora.

        .../Ed

-- 
Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:[email protected]
Member #1, Red Hat Community Ambassador Program


--
Taroon-beta-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/taroon-beta-list