Re: status of jackd? (bug #318098)
Steve Langasek wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 04:23:55PM -0700, Erik Steffl wrote:
well, sometime bugs get all the way to stable, no software is without
bugs. What I was talking about is that 'unstable' is pretty much only
Clearly not, or you wouldn't find it necessary to complain about the fact
that you currently find it unusable.
come on, don't pretend you don't understand (also, I didn't say I
find it unusable, I am mostly trying to figure out what's going on with
clarification: unstable is _closest_ to usable desktop out of what
and it would be really nice if developers wouldn't break it
unneccessarily, like jackd seems to be doing right now. I am not
complaining about occasional problems (like e.g. x.org upgrade) or
really huge efforts like c++ abi change (I think jackd problem is not
part of that but I might be mistaken).
Unstable is, first and foremost, the staging ground for the next stable
release. If users find it usable for their purposes, more power to them.
If not, fixing unstable for them should not take precedence over the actual
development processes; those users should be using something else instead,
or learning how to coexist with development shake-ups while running
well, if it's staging ground for the next stable release care should
be taken for it to be stable enough to be usable, right? I mean if you
cannot install jack then how are you going to develop software that
needs jack? Obviously _some_ problems are pretty much impossible to
avoid (e..g c++ abi change) but I was talking about the attitude towards
_unneccessary_ problems, which is what jackd seems like.
I won't try to suggest here what that other something should be, because I
cannot fathom what sort of a desktop user *needs* cutting-edge software.
The constantly shifting sand dunes of unstable are precisely what I
*wouldn't* look for in a desktop environment that I actually plan to use for
err.... firefox? thunderbird? open office? hotplug? new kernels with
new drivers? new kde or gnome? all of these are under constant
development and stable usually has versions that are very outdated (or
are not there at all).
there's a LOT of functionality for desktops that gets developed in
two or three years it usually takes to release new debian stable. Do you
really need examples of HUGE improvements of desktop related software in
last two years? Or HW support?
Yes, right at _this_ moment stable is pretty new but in few years it
will be obsolete in many aspects again. So please don't argue that
unstable is fresh _now_.