[ale] opening distro war arch vs ubuntu

[Brandon Colbert]

Go debian!
On Dec 30, 2011 5:19 PM, "Jay Lozier" <jslozier at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 12/30/2011 04:38 PM, Brian Mathis wrote:
> > It strikes me that you should have already answered these questions
> > before declaring what distro you will be switching to.
> >
> > Have you spoken to your sysadmins about this?  What platform is your
> > app deployed on in production?  Whatever it is, your dev environment
> > needs to match exactly, and you need to be able to make sure updates
> > are consistent across all systems at any point in time.
> >
> > Developers seem to always want the latest and greatest, and that
> > generally conflicts with the goals of the other parts of an
> > organization, both IT and Business.  The business generally cares
> > about availability more than being cutting edge, since when the site
> > is down they cannot make money from it.
> >
> > One of the most damaging things (from a systems perspective) that one
> > can do in a business is deploy a non-enterprise grade Linux
> > distribution.  This is a clear sign that the sysadmin is just a
> > "computer guy" who happens to get paid to tinker, as opposed to
> > someone who really understands the value of true systems management.
> >
> > Acceptable enterprise distros are Redhat (or CentOS), Suse, and
> > possibly Debian.  Anything else and you are more likely making
> > decisions based on political or religious ideas about what is "better"
> > instead of any real criteria.
> I would add the comprehensiveness of the documentation/help is also
> important (Debian, Suse, Red Hat, Centos, & Ubuntu). Another item to
> consider is the availability of paid support either on an annual
> contract or per incident basis (Red Hat, Suse, & Ubuntu). Arch only has
> online documentation available. I can not comment on who has the best
> paid support, I have never used it with Linux.
>
> The most important issues for company are the uptime and stability for
> users. I echo that most users will not care about bleeding edge rather
> care about getting work done. Thus keeping the users/system up is more
> important than any particular distro. Depending on the balance of
> regular users versus system only/network backbone would color my
> selection. Personally I prefer 'buntu's but I realize my personal
> preferences may conflict with organizational needs, i.e. Red Hat is
> often a better choice for many situations.
> >
> > ❧ Brian Mathis
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Narahari 'n' Savitha
> > <savithari at gmail.com>  wrote:
> >> Friends:
> >>
> >> I am about to switch from Ubuntu to Arch.  The rolling update model of
> arch
> >> suits our dev team better is what I think is good.
> >>
> >> Is anyone using Arch ?
> >> Anyone has had bad experience with Arch ?
> >> How bleeding edge is Arch ?
> >> How soon are fixes available in Arch usually ?
> >> Is AUR any better/worse than PPA ?
> >>
> >> Appreciate your input.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> -Narahari
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ale mailing list
> > Ale at ale.org
> > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> > See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> > http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
>
> --
> Jay Lozier
> jslozier at gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20120101/392a2a21/attachment.html