Hi Larry Linder!

 On 2011.09.29 at 09:32:51 -0400, Larry Linder wrote next:

> Major concern about rolling upgrades is that you never really know the side 
> effects.
> We have been on SL 5.6 for a long time and everything works that we use.
> If SL 6.X is going to be supported for the foreseeable future then we will 
> make the upgrade to all of our systems.
> We use SL 5.6 to run our business, & factory.   For what we do it works and 
> its stable.  Runs on relatively old hardware - a little slower but 
> functional.

Well, I don't see how that's relevant, SL "rolling upgrades" work only
within single major version, like SL5 or SL6. You can say that it's kind
of alternative to completely separating SL5.5 from 5.6, for example.
They have nothing to do with manual upgrades or SL5->SL6 or other
similar migrations.. 


For users, SL concept of "rolling upgrades" provides only benefits: if
you compare SL to CentOS, in SL you have option when you are
version-locked, to for example 6.0 or 5.5 but still get most important
security updates, and you also can get important updates that usually
only come with next release from TUV before same version of SL is
released. It's up to you which of these options to prefer, SL provides
them both. There is no reason to be scared of words "rolling upgrades"
at all, it's a really nice (and optional) feature.

-- 

Vladimir