DirectAdmin for Enterprise 6.0

jlasman said:
If the CentOS delays don't keep getting extended, then I agree we should stick with CentOS. My issue is that as CentOS 6 continues to get delays, the time left before it's EOL gets shorter and shorter, and we're going to need to rebuild servers often, with at least some downtime for users each time.

My hope is that CentOS 6 will be delivered by the end of this month (but remember that's what they said last month) and that DirectAdmin will come out for it without delay. Then we can do a test build on CentOS6, and try ourselves to see if we can switch to SL repositories and then to SL 6.1. Once we see that, we'll know if the two are enough alike so we'll be able to move forward with SL if need be.

Note the we here refers to me and to my company, and my support for my clients; it has nothing to do with JBMC the company, or DirectAdmin the product.

Jeff
Click to expand...



Not sure why you are in such a big hurry for 6 to come out? Why are you panicking here? Have you not been around for the last few versions? I know you have been... but wow... ease off the panic button a little.
 
It's not panic. It's about EOL considerations.

The main reason we use an Enterprise OS is long term support. We want long term support because we don't want the downtime which occurs when we rebuild servers. We don't rebuild in place between major distribution version numbers because doing so is considered to not be a good practice as it can update libraries upon which some installed software may depend.

CentOS 6 support as well as CentOS 5 support will end based on the Red Hat support timetable, even if CentOS is very late.

If we build a CentOS 5 server now it has an EOL of much sooner than we'd like, but not only that, so does CentOS 6 when it finally comes out.

Jeff
 
Not to mention the concern that it could never come out. See what happened to White Box Linux which we used before CentOS first came out.

Jeff
 
Moved again to July, 3. This already looks like the Neverending Story.

And Scientific Linux is now on 6.1 beta 2.
 
redesb said:
Moved again to July, 3. This already looks like the Neverending Story. [..]
Click to expand...

Wrong. They have not moved it since user "meto" reported that it was moved with another week. And it is not July, 3, but july 1, wich is the same date they moved it when "meto" reported it moved. External mirrors is july, 4.

I can't believe you guys. You are the most impatient and ungrateful people I have ever seen. Let it take the time it need to become a good product. If you don't want to wait, please go help them out finishing the job, this is open source and free software wich you are not paying anything for!
 
Last edited:
ditto said:
Wrong. They have not moved it since user "meto" reported that it was moved with another week. And it is not July, 3, but july 1, wich is the same date they moved it when "meto" reported it moved. External mirrors is july, 4.

I can't believe you guys. You are the most impatient and ungrateful people I have ever seen. Let it take the time it need to become a good product. If you don't want to wait, please go help them out finishing the job, this is open source and free software wich you are not paying anything for!
Click to expand...

Relax dude. The calendar is a rough gauge of progress, rather than one that says X will be done by Y date, it's more of a X will be done at the earliest by Y date.

It's been a long 8 months wait since RHEL 6 was released last Nov so it's understandable that people are getting impatient. Fortunately the devs seem to indicate that releasing 6.1 should be a lot faster since most of the difficulties relating to build 6.x are resolved.
 
The last time I checked we were all using Directadmin for Business purposes. The reality is that DA could of and probably should of used Redhat as the build environment and then we could of chosen CentOS or Scientific Linux.

I echo jlasman in saying my primary concern is installing any OS that is nearing its EOL dates. Centos 5 is old, the included versions of software are reaching the stale point. I have a whack of new servers waiting for 6 because the time to migrate after the fact is unacceptable.

I'm generally a very patient person and look forward to the Centos team delivering next week, but if the date moves we need a DA build on Redhat or SL.
 
Today is July 1st, and the calendar (centos.org) shows that CentOS 6 is still on track for today. Hopefully it'll stay on track for now.

I can understand why DirectAdmin staff would rsther stick with CentOS, and I understand the expenses involved in building Red Hat Enterprise Linux, but if CentOS continues to slip in newer releases (time will tell) then I'd like to see a move toward the distribution which offers the fastest release of a stable Red Hat Enterprise workalike.

Jeff
 
Update - 7/3 -- Syncing to internal mirrors

Yes, the rumors are true, 6.0 is currently being synced out to the CentOS internal mirror network. That means that we're on track to open it up to external mirrors in a day or two.

There are still some small fixes happening, and the updates/ packages still need to be re-signed, but that should all happen in the next day or so.
Click to expand...

http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa/node/102
 
It's those two words small fixes that scare me a bit; but let's see what's going on by the end of the week.

Jeff
 
They found another delaying issue (same link). Why must bad news come from people named Jeff? :D

Jeff
 
Note the warnings that syncing may not be comlete and that you should check the CentOS Announce mailing list for info when it is. But the mailing list archives are two days old. So I'd say wait until a day or two after the main CentOS page (centos.org) page lists it as available, to make sure the mirrors are stable and you'll get some download speed.

My opinion, anyway.

Jeff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top