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

Re: I broke it - again.

On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 09:40:31PM +0200, Michael Moerz typed:
} On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 12:41:49PM -0500, An Thi-Nguyen Le wrote:
} > } But do you think the creators of the whole packaging system suppose you to
} > } manually upgrade/downgrade everything? I should normally work without much
} > } user-interference.
} > 
} > It's *unstable*.  It's **unstable**.   It's UNSTABLE.  
} > 
} > We're talking about one situation where things broke down.  In an 
} > unstable, pretty dang near experimental (if not already so) distribution.
} >
} unstable is unstable, only experienced people should run UNSTABLE. 
} experimental is experimental, only hard core people or ill minded people will 
} take this.

I fall into the latter category of ill-minded people actually.  :)

} I am complete your opinion that things are allowed to break. If someone
} feels the way of using unstable it's completely left over to him to repair
} things when  something breaks. In some situations even the experienced
} people have to cope  with problems they have never seen before. Then
} they might ask somebody else. So I see nothing illegal about asking
} questions at all.

I'm not saying that asking questions is illegal.  :-/  Nor am I attacking 
you for answering questions.  My concern was just that the latter criticism 
of the packaging system didn't apply here because it was a Weird Situation.  
Stuff doesn't always work out.  On the other hand, version pinning (in the 
CVS version of apt, I believe) is going to be coming someday, which will 
probably relieve some headaches.

} Newbies to unstable might give it a try, but they may face a
} unrecoverable situation. The point is that this group of people seems
} to grow cause they wanna use the most recently software. What follows
} is *sigh* that they do not read this or other mailing-lists and end up
} in situations that are everything else than good.

Very true.  But unstable is *still* unstable, regardless of whether people 
ignore it or not.  It's a risk.  It's not been thoroughly tested.  While 
an influx of new testers is prolly a good thing, it's not a good thing if 
they're not prepared for it.  What about RedHat's Rawhide, for instance?

} I have been using unstable for over a year now, currently I am in the
} progress of becoming a debian-maintainer and I think that I can master
} debian. Of course sometimes I find *new* features that have been there
} a long time but I wasn't aware of them.   Normally I tend to be able
} to fix problems without help. I mean I try as long as it takes me to
} make it work, but yes there are people who shoot around with question
} even before they face a problem.

It's OK to ask questions and such.  I would ask a *ton* of questions.
No one is going to figure out everything on their own.  At the same time 
it's usually nice and respectful to others if the questioner has done a 
little bit of research, at least imho.

} What results now is that I will NOT answere any issues here
} anymore. Neither if they are easy to resolve or not. I was tired, tried my
} best and surely was not realy coping good with the situation. I already
} apologiezed for my behaviour and I do now again. If you feel better now,
} I will not.

You are over-reacting to *one* post.  *ONE* post, made by a relatively 
ill-informed person.

An Thi-Nguyen Le
|The Moral Majority is neither.

Reply to: