On 07/24/2011 01:24 AM, Tom H wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 3:10 AM, Yasha Karant<[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>>
>> To be clear:  this is not a "friend", but a high ranking engineering person
>> at a vendor who was presenting his personal, or his firm's internal, expert
>> opinion. My posting was an attempt to discover any data relevant to the
>> opinion, as well as to at least get the distribution release testing
>> policy/methodology for SL (and perhaps CentOS if there were any CentOS
>> organization persons on the SL list willing to comment) once there is a
>> release of source from RH (source that RH is required to release).
>
> You should ask that "high ranking engineering person" for the proof
> and the bugs. I've asked two of our RHEL "reps" what they think of SL
> or CentOS and they've said that they're "crap." Personal and/or
> institutional bias isn't fact.

I fully agree.  I have heard similar sentiments from RH sales/marketing 
employees who need the licensing volume.  I actually have asked the 
vendor, but those are internal matters to this vendor.  On a separate 
matter, responding to a poster who indicates something akin that one 
gets one pays for and that the SL/CentOS deployment methodology is the 
same as Fedora, I have looked over the documents to which that poster 
refers, and based upon that reading, is one of the reasons I attempt to 
avoid Fedora or any other beta- or enthusiast-software unless there is 
no choice (right now, this machine is using a sub 1.0 NetworkManger rpm 
implementation as provided with the RHEL 5.6 release -- but it is 
working and allows a substantially simpler user interface for connection 
to myriad networks when one must travel).  I have not been able to find 
equivalent documents for CentOS or SL (or RHEL for that matter).  In 
reality, RH support for EL is defective as well -- the issue of a major 
defect in the USB 3 support in RHEL 6 that was not considered serious 
enough for a fix in actual RHEL support correspondence is an example in 
point.  To that same poster, one should point out that Fermilab (to 
date), CERN, and Princeton University all are (reasonably) well funded 
organizations (much more so than the institution at which I am tenured), 
yet each has elected to support a redistribution of RHEL from RH source 
instead of simply licensing the executable environment RPMs with support.

Yasha Karant