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.