On 01/26/2012 11:00 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Todd And Margo Chester
> <[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Is it just me or did CentOS beat us to 6.2?  (Now that is humiliatin' !)
>
> There is no such thing as "beat"ing. Let me quote my own post I placed
> in a CentOS forum a while ago (with minor adjustment):
>
> "There seem to be people who feel there is a "race" between CentOS and SL.
>
> SL has always been following their routine of going from Alpha (1 or
> 2) ->  Beta (1 or 2) ->  RC (1 or 2) ->  GA. Each release is separated by
> 1-2 weeks. So, it typically takes 2 to 3 months for them to do the
> final release. This time scheme is not a problem for SL users because
> security updates are made available in a timely manner (similar to the
> CR repo by CentOS) and they have been doing this exercise from day one
> (back in 2003??).
>
> So, when CentOS had a [huge] delay, people say SL "beat" CentOS. When
> CentOS gets the release out in 2 weeks, they say CentOS "beat" SL. As
> far as SL is concerned there is no such race. I don't think SL would
> ever change its release process to "beat" other clones."
>
> Glad I had a chance to re-use the message in the SL mailing list as well.
>
> Akemi
>

Hi Akemi,

    I stand corrected.  Thank you for the explanation.

-T