I do like Fedora, no doubt! Unfortunately having to maintain my system all 6 Months with a full update is a nogo!
That's why CentOS exists, no?
To GP: there is absolutely no reason whatever that you have to upgrade every 6 months. NONE. Every release is supported until one month after the SECOND release following. That means 13 months of life. You can upgrade as fast as every 6 months or as slow as every 12-13 months. Admittedly, that is still a pretty demanding rate.
To P: yes, but RHEL/CentOS has got its own severe problems. Fedora is too bleeding edge unless you're really into the latest and greatest. RHEL/CentOS remains supported for about a decade, but development is WAY too slow. It is just absurd that on RHEL/CentOS you are frozen in with 2010's RHEL6 with gcc 4.4.7 until you FINALLY get 4.8.2 with RHEL7 sometime in 2014; my guess is not very far from midyear at the earliest. That is just so antiquated it is sad. That is just one example of how ancient some of the components get after 4 years. Even as it stands, the day RHEL7 goes GA, gcc is going to be obsolete, because gcc 4.9 will probably be out by then, with key c++ 14 ("1y") support. Sigh.
I don't know what the answer is. It is not easy to find a happy medium. I guess if RHEL release rates were really every 18-24 months as they have always claimed to aim for, nobody would be anywhere near as exasperated as they are now. But it is almost surely going to be at least 40 months from RHEL6 to 7, and that is just way, way too slow. Keep the decade of support, but change the spacing from 3.5 years to 1.75 or so. That would be just about ideal, IF it could be managed.
But I think if it were possible to do that, they would be doing it. You can't always get what you want no how.