I am well aware of the stress in a volunteer organization working under externally or internally imposed deadlines, as surely the fink team feels with the situation under 10.2. The condition I noted are a problem precisely because it contradicts the careful coding work and clear dedication visible in the product.
These comments are typical:
Nor did I feel so forced. This is not even tangential to my point -- I am not complaining that there is no update nor that there is no update matrix. I am warning that a state of chaos exists that compromises your project. I was not forced, but I was encouraged.Nobody forced anybody to update to 0.5.0.
An update was posted prematurely -- it turned out to be unusable to your existing user base. The web page and README persist in referencing misleading material and in suggesting there is a usable update. Really now, does the comment "shortcomings of the current upgrade matrix page" truly reflect the situation and properly guide the user? How about "Warning: This release is intended only for new installs. Existing users please be patient while we work out details in the upgrade path. In the mean time, if you have recently upgraded to OS X 10.2 (Jaguar) and cannot wait, use <a href="http://fink.sourceforge.net/news/jaguar.php"; this upgrade method</a>."
I am perhaps holding Fink up to higher standards of user experience than exists elsewhere in the Open Source community. After all, you are developers, not PR and marketing types, and those are the folks that bloat the price of software after all. But, really, they do add some value.
I really don't think much more needs to be done here. Just asking a few questions and holding to some quality control standard in usability as you now hold in stable package releases. And a little thought to web navigation. Who did you post the 0.5.0a release for? How does the material you posted help their experience with fink? Is essential installation and update material up-to-date and clearly linked on the main web page?
Another good example, the previous patch for 10.2 has disappeared from the web page. It was pointed out to me that it still exist under the link "Older News...", which is to say, it does not exist. If I make no sense, then you are not approaching the problem from the correct mindset of your user base.
Whose rudeness, exactly? I have said nothing rude and, indeed, have written with extensive respect and regard for the project and concern for its stature. I refuse to accept that I am marginal in my perspective. In fact, I am far more sympathetic to the Open Source culture than the majority of my colleagues, who are arriving at OS X/Fink from commercial unix platforms. Derrogating constructive remarks as pointless bitching is done at the peril of turing the project into one of building sand castles, or worse, forming a private club.With my apologies to fink contributors for other's rudeness,
The fact of the matter is that OS X Macs are quite arguably the best desktop unix sustems available. However, Apple has contributed only part way to that status, and Fink the rest. If I am frustrated, it is really Apple that bears the burden and Fink that earns my gratitude.
--
Eric Salathe
Climate Impacts Group <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
University of Washington <http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~salathe>
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:
With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel
http://hpc.devchannel.org/
_______________________________________________
Fink-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
