On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 09:51:33 -0200 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 16, 2013, David Seikel wrote: > > > On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 12:54:19 +0200 "Alex-P. Natsios" > > <[email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > stupid suggestions but can certainly happen if you forget to check > > > them :) > > > > > > 1) what autofoo versions does Ubuntu 11.04 have? maybe its too > > > old? 2) same goes for their GCC version > > > > I was gonna rant and rave about not being too old, but then checked > > and Ubuntu 11.04 HAS reached EOL (End Of Life) in October. So yes, > > good idea to upgrade Ubuntu in this case. > > > > <rant> > > Now, had it been Ubuntu 10.04, that's a whole other story, it's not > > past it's EOL yet, so versions of autofoo and gcc on it are by > > definition, not too old. Coz the definition of "too old" should NOT > > include popular distros that are still supported by their makers. > > </rant> > > > Ahahah. That means nothing, really. Who committed to LTS of that > version is Canonical/Ubuntu, not Enlightenment. Imagine a scenario > where some crazy dude says he has a distribution with 20 year > support, we'll try to match?! I think you missed the word "popular" there. There are no popular distros with 20 year support. I don't expect there will ever be. One crazy dude might create one, but not many people will use it. Your argument is invalid. > Also, two key problems with your rationale of rant: > - if Ubuntu committed to LTS, it's their duty to fix stuff for > their distro. -- back ports > - they won't back port EFL as its a new addition and they don't > support this (as expected, they do LTS for stuff they released in > April 2010) You are completely ignoring the reason WHY people use LTS style distros. If there were not good valid reasons for using an LTS, then they would not be popular. B-) The reason for an LTS is stable long term support. That kinda goes against "just update it" philosophy. It's stable, for a long time, that means old versions of stuff that JUST WORKS, and will stay working. This is things people like, lots of people. It's Canononicals responsibility to keep it stable for a long time, that's why they make an LTS, that's their promise. They do backports, sure, but that's an OPTION, and not every one wants that option. "Popular" is the important word here. If it's not popular, then we don't care. If it's popular, then we will get lots of "don't work here", followed by "just update", followed by "not gonna update, I have good reasons to not update, therefore E devs suck". As was mentioned in the Windows debate, we choose to be portable, that includes being portable to popular versions of Linux distros, even if they are a bit long in the tooth. Drawing the line at "still supported by their maker" and "popular" makes sense. Drawing the line at "I updated to the latest bleeding edge version yesterday, so that's mandatory now, fuck anyone else", does not make sense when we are trying to be portable. To bring it back on topic - Ubuntu 11.04 EOLed months ago, so we can drop support for it according to my theory. B-) I wont go into things like Windows XP, where the maker tried to EOL it, but it was so popular they had to unEOL it. lol -- A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow - 200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts. SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
