On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Alan Bartlett <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On 11 July 2012 02:10, Akemi Yagi <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Steven Haigh <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> On 11/07/2012 10:49 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>>>> A particular client's mirror of CentOS exploded today with the
>>>> unannounced CentOS 6.3 release. Congratulations to them for such quick
>>>> work: is there a nominal release date for SL 6.3, so I can make sure
>>>> to allocate disk space?
>>>
>>> What is it with people thinking that CentOS is some kind of competition for
>>> SL or RHEL?
>>>
>>> Sure, CentOS do things differently. If it compiles, ship it.
>>>
>>> SL will more than likely do a Beta, RC, then release - just like they have
>>> with each other point release.
>>
>> Indeed. I hate to repeatedly quote my old post, but as far as there
>> are people who say "beat", I feel like doing it :)
>>
>> http://listserv.fnal.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1201&L=scientific-linux-users&T=0&P=17067
>>
>> Akemi
>
> Furthermore, the release of CentOS 6.3 was not "unannounced".
>
> For the record, here is the official announcement --
>
> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2012-July/018706.html
>
> Alan.

I'm perhaps being unclear, An announcemenbt that goes out at the same
time as the release itself is not helpful. They've selected as a
matter of policy not to announce pending releases: it drove me nuts,
and and is one of the contributing reasons to my switch to Scientific
Linux.

Scientific Linux's very effective "rolling" updates for components,
before a new release is published, has  been very, very helpful to me
in my personal research work building new packages. I'm not doing a
panicky, unplanned rebuild of my packages for what is an unplanned and
unexpected release with hundreds of updated components: I can keep my
testing environments up to date before the release.