Re: X-posting alert: Multiple songs playing simultaneously (Amarok)
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:21 AM, AG <computing.account@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 28/12/12 15:31, Chris Bannister wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 02:11:14PM +0000, AG wrote:
>>> I thought that the Debian user community might want to be aware of
>>> the response from one of the Amarok team I received when asking
>>> about a problem I had with Amarok in Squeeze playing two (or more)
>>> tracks simultaneously.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Simply because the Amarok folk (or Myriam anyway) (a) advocates dropping
> Debian in favour of a derived distro with a faster release cycle and (b)
> expects people to update their system to match Amarok releases, when the
> software is buggy in a past release. As I replied in my original post -
> that's like the tail wagging the dog.
Debian (and other "slow-moving" distributions) have a problem with
applications that are fast-moving. The developers either don't have
the resources to work on a older release (most likely) or prefer to
focus on new features, etc.
Amarok isn't the only such desktop application. There are even
non-desktop applications that have this problem:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=672695
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/05/msg00610.html
>>> I just don't think that Myriam's response was at all helpful - and
>>> say as much - and for her to propose that I change my distro in
>>> order to match Amarok's release cycles is quite absurd.
>>
>> Her response was pretty good compared to some other responses I've seen
>> regarding bugs in old (as far as the developers are concerned) software.
>> Usually, its something like: Upgrade to latest version from cvs and see
>> if bug is still present.
>
> Well, that's hardly a justification or an excuse, especially if developers
> give a hoot about their user base.
You can't simply assume that they don't care; keeping more than one
version up-to-date takes "bodies." The latest Fedora release has been
delayed by a couple of months because of a switch to a new installer
that's proved problematic and the impossibility of keeping the old
installer up-to-date as a fallback because of the entire development
team had to focus on the new installer. So even RH doesn't have the
resources for dual-track development (or prefers not to expend the
development and QA resources for dual-track development).
Reply to: