Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2008 14:11:36 -0500 From: Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CLARITY re: challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3 Message-ID: <4C198A92A6055152F92E8C36@Macintosh.local> In-Reply-To: <3cc535c80806080449q3ec6e623v8603e9eccc3ab1f2@mail.gmail.com> References: <3cc535c80806080449q3ec6e623v8603e9eccc3ab1f2@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--On June 8, 2008 1:49:35 PM +0200 Andy Kosela <andy.kosela@gmail.com> wrote: > > FreeBSD has always been known for its legendary stability and mature > code base which is why many commercial companies depend on it every > day. "The anomaly" as someone said of long term support for 4.x releases > only helped to see FreeBSD as more stable and viable solution than Linux > by many businesses. Mission critical systems needs long term support > (read: at least backporting security patches) and stable systems that > can run for years without interruption. When it comes to stability vs > development maybe there is time to rethink FreeBSD overall strategy and > goals. Major companies using FreeBSD in their infrastructure like Yahoo! > or Juniper Networks would definetly benefit from such moves focused on > long term support of stable releases. I honestly think it is in their > interest to support, even financially Interesting thoughts. Maybe the time is ripe for a RedHat-like support company for FreeBSD. Paul Schmehl If it isn't already obvious, my opinions are my own and not those of my employer.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C198A92A6055152F92E8C36>