Don Head wrote:
>> "All we are saying
>> Is give min a chance"
(...)
> The "bleeding edge" issue I actually like when it comes to
> a number of projects; MySQL, Apache, PHP, FreeCiv,
> KDE/Konqueror, etc. Yes, "bleeding edge" in a
These are projects which have proven to be viable and well tested
(version >= 1.0). So there is little risk to destroy what used to work,
as long as you don't ship beta versions (eg KDE) or remove patches that
people like (eg Eazel theme).
Where it hurts, it's that Mandrake ship programs which are not even beta,
with version number near 0.0.x : even the *developer* would not expect
the prog to work, so what the point in releasing that to the public? I
started to use Linux when Mandrake was born. Hence, I've tried almost
every Mandrake since 5.1 (~Mandrake 1.0). Since then, what has really
evolved in Mandrake are:
- large projects, like KDE, GIMP, etc., what you mentionned above.
- Mandrake specific tools (much better than RedHat's...)
On the other side, what is always driving Mandrake down are the tons of
untested and undebugged applications that spoil the very needed
impression of quality. That's why I reproach the quantity of packages in
Mandrake, and require a Minimal Install and/or Mandrake-Core OS.
In the ideal world, developers would not ship broken programs. But we
cannot blame the developers : it is very difficult, even for the serious
programmer (like me <laugh>), to test his program in every aspect,
especially in event-driven applications. The less than ideal world we
live in, has only one long-term alternative : to create a clean minimal
system (Mandrake-Core, or whatever you would call it). You will have
only thoroughly tested applications, and *zero* broken stuff. To sum it
up : "What is not known to work, does not ship". Simple, and very
attractive motto for investors.
> distribution with a lot of packages is even worse, but
> that, IMHO, doesn't really have anything to do with
> installation architectures, goes against my personal
> beliefs (I use Mandrake *because* of it's
> "bleeding-edginess" (and it's open development model, which
> I *REALLY* like)), and is a discussion that should be taken
> to another thread.
Ok, that's what I did. =)
About Mandrake open development model, I agree that it suits particularly
right to Free Software, as long as you do NOT assume that users are
testers. A few days ago, someone at MandrakeSoft sent a message stating
"I've released that, but not tested it". What the point in releasing
stuff you haven't tested? Is this what is called Quality Assurance?
Gr�goire, translator (that does not hurt anything).
PS : anyone ever tested the Polish(ed) distribution? If so, would you
mind mailing me privately with what you think about it? TIA.
