[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!

I agree, we shouldn't care about "keeping up with the other dists" when
stability may suffer because of it.  At the same time, as you have noticed,
there are a number of commercial packages out there that may require the newer
kernel versions, or apps.  We do NOT want people to choose Redhat over Debian
just because they can't run the Linux apps they want to.  I'm not saying that I
care for these commercial apps, but a business that WANTS to run Debian, as well
as run a commercial app should be able to.

							Dave Bristel

On Sun, 12 Mar 2000, Jacob Kuntz wrote:

> Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 01:02:42 -0500
> From: Jacob Kuntz <jpk@cape.com>
> To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Danger Will Robinson! Danger!
> Resent-Date: 12 Mar 2000 06:01:56 -0000
> Resent-From: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ;
> Hamish Moffatt (hamish@debian.org) wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 11, 2000 at 04:06:01PM -0500, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> > > our biggest handicap is that we're always a year behind everyone else. being
> > > a year behind is suicide in any industry. being a year behind in an industry
> > 
> > Have you listened to yourself? Depends on what your aims are; if you want
> > to be hip, cool, most popular etc then I guess 'new' is a higher
> > priority than 'stable'. Otherwise, let's stick with the proven 2.2
> > series.
> > 
> aarrgghh. you are missing the point.
> what i'm trying to get across here is that we aren't keeping up with what's
> going on in the rest of the world. linux and other free software projects
> are rapidly becoming something very good. in order to facilitate and
> encourage this, we distribution coordinators need to pull not neccicarily
> the latest but certianly the greatest free software together in a usefull,
> functional way.
> the issue at hand here is not the kernel. the issue is the release practice.
> i think there should be an initiative to bring out stable releases more
> often. if we don't, it will be just another excuse to use commercial
> software. i don't think any of us want that. on the other hand, bringing out
> any software package prematurly will also discourage use of free software.
> i was really hoping the we could get past the knee-jerk reactionary comments
> like "hell no, we won't put in an untested kernel" and get on with "here's
> how we could make more stable releases".
> i see no problem at all with waiting for 2.4.10 (or so) before shoving that
> in the users lap. just so long as we do get it in before it too is obsolete.
> > 
> > Hamish
> > -- 
> > Hamish Moffatt VK3SB. CCs of replies on mailing lists are welcome.
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> > 
> -- 
> (jacob kuntz)                    jpk@cape.com jake@{megabite,underworld}.net
> (megabite systems)                       "think free speech, not free beer."
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: