challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3

[Kris Kennaway]

Paul Schmehl wrote:
> --On Thursday, June 05, 2008 17:53:01 +0100 Tom Evans 
> <tevans.uk at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think that, especially with open source products, there is a large
>> emphasis on testing in your own environments, and choosing the 'correct'
>> version of a particular software package is important. For example, at
>> $JOB, we had a lot of servers running 6.1 as it was an extended lifetime
>> release, so no point jumping to 6.2, instead we waited for 6.3 to pass
>> our integration testing.
>>
> 
> Not everyone has those kinds of resources.  The domain I'm referring to 
> is a hobby site, run by a husband and wife.  They started with shared 
> hosting and moved to a dedicated box when I volunteered to help with the 
> backend work.  For several years we ran one server hosting dns, imaps, 
> smtps, mail lists and websites.
> 
> Yes, it's not ideal, but when you have zero income you do what you can. 
> Testing like you describe is out of the question.
> 
> We now have the embarrassment of riches of two servers; one for web and 
> the old one for the rest.  The old box is still running 5.4 SECURITY.  
> The new box is running 6.1.  I'd *like* to upgrade both boxes, and the 
> older box can go offline comfortably for several hours without anyone 
> but me noticing.  But if the web box goes down for 30 seconds, queries 
> from the users start pouring in.

Come now, even some of the biggest websites on the planet have scheduled 
downtime :)

Kris