On Sun, 2003-03-30 at 19:39, Per �yvind Karlsen wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Sunday 30 March 2003 20:25, Steffen Barszus wrote: > > On Sunday 30 March 2003 19:31, Edward Tandi wrote: > > > On Sun, 2003-03-30 at 13:03, Duncan wrote: > > > > On Sat 29 Mar 2003 20:23, Leon Brooks posted as excerpted below: > > > > > On Sunday 30 March 2003 09:00, Edward Tandi wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 17:46, webudo2 wrote: > > > > > >> A bugfree released MDK 9.2 > > > > > > > > > > > > Hooray! I'll vote for that. What about all those RPM requests in > > > > > > Ma[n]drakeClub? We should have all of them too! > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone else see the irony in this? (-: > > > > > > > > Yes. W/ the 100% bugs fixed, I'd asked myself if he was considering a > > > > release in late 3003 or not. Add all the club requests, AND make THEM > > > > 100% bug free as well, and what are we looking at now, a late 5003 > > > > release, perhaps? > > > > > > I wouldn't take my comment too seriously, I should have put a smiley > > > into that e-mail. It's just that using this mailing list as forum for > > > input into product direction doesn't seem right. You are bound to get "I > > > want this" and "I want that" and eventually it will be "I want > > > everything". Well of course we do! > > > > > > But I do personally think that the quality is beginning to suffer. I > > > think Mandrake should be releasing less frequently and have a longer > > > stability/testing/fixing period. If you look at the reviews of Linux > > > distros, the highest points are awarded to those that work with the > > > least number of problems. > > > > > > But at the same time, It would have been good to get more of the > > > Club-requested apps into the release. Its all swings and roundabouts. > > > > > > > No bugs is impossible. Some improvement in Bugzilla using would help a bit. > > What you get if you want a "No Bug"-distro you'll see if you install debian > > stable. I would say wrong target for mandrake , isn't it ? ;)
OK, I didn't say I wanted a 100% bug free release. I don't think it is realistically possible. But I think it should be better. > yupp, we have quite a different focus, eg. we focus more on having stuff > working easily, good at the same time secure, also that things are up to > date, while in debian they're more focused on having things secure, and > does'nt care much about the other things I mentioned, also they don't have to > do releases as often as debian is a non-profit organization while > mandrakesoft is a commercial company, and also when considering how fast > things evolve in the open source world, I really don't think we should have > longer release cycles.. so yes, I agree on this being a wrong target:) > you have to have a certain balance.. > - -- Debian is at the other extreme and I would agree that one of the reasons I use Mandrake is because it _is_ up to date. Debian may be stable, but I find it a bit backward in relation to Desktop usage. Still, I see no harm in extending the devlopment cycle by a month or two to iron out those really in-your-face customer facing bugs. On the subject of being a "commercial company", it does raise the question of how the Mandrake Bugs handling process works. How are they prioritised? Do we have a bugs statistics summary? What is the release criteria? What is the maximum numner of "Major" bugs allowed in the release? I don't want to labour my point further, its just that I find it hard to recommend Mandrake for use in the "comapny". Part of this is because of the aforementioned quality issue (you have to get the IT department to suffer with many laptop installations) and part of this is Mandrake's Financial position. Don't get me wrong, I really like Mandrake (and I have shares), but I want to see it succeed. Ed-T.
