Re: Debian desktop -situation, proposals for discussion and change. Users point of view.
On 17-May-07, 06:23 (CDT), "Mgr. Peter Tuharsky" <tuharsky@misbb.sk> wrote:
>
> I think the LSB-compliance and reasonably short (or reasonably long)
> release cycle are inevitable goals. The sooner achieved (naturally), the
> better.
>
You know, Debian has been discussing how to speed up releases while
supporting many architectures and still maintaining our strong
reputation for a technically solid and stable system for oh, about 10
years now. Lots and lots of people have worked on this. We've gotten
better. Not perfect, by any means, but not bad. In particular, we've
tried to balance the needs of a variety of users, which means that many
users are not going to be perfectly satisfied.
Some people have seen one of our weaknesses (up-to-date desktop
software), and built a buisness out of it. I say good for them. Debian
*can't* be all things to all people. Let some other people work on
particular problems. We'll learn from them, and they'll learn from us.
Isn't that one of the points of free software, that we don't have to
duplicate everything?
> Next thing, quite utopistic one but inevitable in long terms, should be
> the common infrastructure for bug reporting, so that users would report
> bugs easily, and the developers would not need to interchange the bug
> data between users and upstream, but upstream would get them directly
> instead.
That doesn't work. A lot of upstream authors don't want to hear about
Debian specific bugs. The user doesn't want to (and often can't)
distinguish between Debian and upstream bugs. We make it easy to report
bugs to us, and it's our job to work from there.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world. -- seen on the net
Reply to: