"Riyad Kalla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is not a flame, but more of a request or a plead, however you watn to
> see it. I really want to use mandrake, but the issues noted above keep me
> from it. I really feel a longer devel cycle, EVEN if you are just sitting on
> the product and releasing betas, gives you an incredibly stable product just
> through the process of elimination. I kinda of equate the difference of what
> long cycle of betas can do to the Quake3 release cycle and the Ultima 9
> release cycle.
>
> But I digress, it was ugly, and could have been totally avoided. What are
> the developer's thoughts on the shorter devel cycle of Mandrake? Is this by
> choice, or is it out of excitment and want to be "ahead of the curve" that
> the releases are made?
We developpers would like a very large development cycle, that's true. We
don't like the frozen state (can't upgrade anything, blah), we don't like
to have deadlines that lead to the problems you pointed out because of
lack of time to fix them.
But, well, that's life.. frozen state is here to being able to fix the
bugs..
It's a hard problem. A cool way to fix the minor problems you report (such
app segfaulting, such app misconfigured) is to having the maximum output
from our beta testers (you). Another way would be to hire more people, but
it's very hard to hire people. (apparently).
Anyway, for upcoming versions, please you and your friends who laugh after
Mandrake for unstability (we won't feel angry after you if this is true!),
why not reporting each of the problems so we can fix them..
See you,
--
Guillaume Cottenceau
