Re: "I do consider Ubuntu to be Debian" , Ian Murdock

[Joe Hart <j.hart@orange.nl>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Roberto � wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 11:35:02AM -0700, Michael M. wrote:
>> The schedule that the release team puts together.  It contains target
>> release dates.  Debian missed its December target for Etch.  It remains
>> to be seen whether it will make the new target of 2 April 2007.
>>
>> Call it what you want:  schedule, timeline, target, whatever.  The point
>> is that the Debian Project doesn't value it enough to stick to it.  I
> 
> That's not really a fair characterization.  The Debian project (release
> managers, developers, et al) value the target dates.  However, they
> value completeness and stability *more* than the calendar.
> 
>> doubt there's a large software project in existance that hasn't missed
>> its targets sometimes -- Ubuntu, Fedora, openSuSE all have had release
>> delays in recent memory, and then there's Windows Vista.  But Debian is
>> fairly unique in being so cavalier about it.
>>
> Again, that is wrong.  If you follow the developer and release mailing
> lists, you will see that tons of effort goes into making the Debian
> release something that can be done with minimal effort on the part of
> the admin.  This is no easy task.  Debian includes a tremendous amount
> of software, which can be configured in nearly innumerable
> configurations.
> 
>> Like I said, it's the "when it's ready" attitude taken to the extreme --
>> to the exclusion of providing users any kind of predictablility or
>> expectations of timeliness -- that I don't like.
>>
> I started with Debian shortly after Woody was released.  I remember
> being disappointed with the repeated delays of Sarge.  However, I stuck
> with it because I knew that when the release finally did come it would
> be rock solid.  I currently have around a dozen servers in production
> running Sarge doing things from serving LTSP, mail servers, web servers,
> file servers, LDAP servers, etc.
> 
> Now, all the development and user lists are open to the public.
> Debian's entire BTS is accessible by the public.
> 
> However, the predictability that it appears you want, timely releases at
> predefined intervals, is not very likely to be realistic with Debian.
> Debian is not motivated by trying to get good PR for being on time or by
> trying to make money with a quick release.  So, you are "stuck" with
> people who are making their best efforts to produce a quality free
> operating system.
> 
> If you don't like it, I believe that Debian has a 100% money-back
> guarantee.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Roberto
> 

I think I promised earlier in this thread to stay quiet, but it's moved
on since then.

Roberto, you are perfectly correct in your above statements.  Debian is
not released as beta software like so many other systems.  For that we
have Testing and Unstable.  When a stable release is made, everyone will
know that it is stable.

There should be no calender.  It should be measured in quality, just
like it is.  If one doesn't like having to wait for things to be marked
stable, they can upgrade to Testing or even Unstable, but they have to
accept the risks that go along with that upgrade.  If they don't want
that risk, then there is nothing that says they can't switch to another
distribution, but from my experience (which I admit is limited), no
other system offers both the flexibility nor the quality of Debian.

Joe


- --
Registerd Linux user #443289 at http://counter.li.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGCB49iXBCVWpc5J4RAgFzAJ4+3EnSVV9FH2XvA5GUx2tdUkS2bACfb5BS
g3D2B/r07I+LjHYAC81Z0T0=
=ZrvJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----