On Tue, 2004-06-22 at 22:05, Timothy Murphy wrote: > As far as I can see, > FC2 was released when there were known unresolved bugs in the test releases. > In my view, it should have been delayed until these were fixed. > It seems to have been released because a release date > had been fixed in advance. > That is a silly way to organise distributions. > I hope it will be changed. I hope it won't. Please keep releasing early and often. That is the only way a large and complex beast like a Linux distro can mature quickly. As soon as the developers and packagers feel that it maybe of use and value to a sizable user community they should kick it out of the door and let the real QA begin. Linux is designed to work on a huge variety of hardware. Exposing it to as large a test group as possible is the only hope of having at least the more common of all the countless possible combinations of hardware put to test. As for FC1 vs FC2, FC2 is special in many respects. I see FC1 as the debut release meant to introduce the project to a wider audience, but it was quite conservative, and not really that much different from RH9. FC2 is groundbreaking: it uses a new generation kernel (as one of the first mainstream distros), a new GNOME, a new Xserver (sort of), and whatnot. You couldn't possibly wait for all known unresolved bugs in this to be fixed before you release the lot. It would never get released. It would stew in its own juices for decades (like Hurd) without getting any closer to completion. Btw, have you ever checked how many thousand known bugs every new Mozilla release carries over? Speaking of the kernel, remember 2.4? Is wasn't really fit for mainstream consumption before 2.4.10 or thereabouts. Chances are the 2.6 kernel will mature quicker, partly to its bigger exposure by mainstream distros (assuming a lot of people actually give them a go). I don't believe various posters on this thread are out to excuse bugs, and neither am I. We are just annoyed at the small bunch of people that grab of lot of air time bitching and ranting and scaring people away from FC2, rather than encouraging them to participate. Bring on your bug reports, preferably with bugzilla ID, and everybody who can will be glad to discuss them. But chanting the same horror tales like a broken record over and over, and questioning QA, release strategy and state of mind of those people at RedHat isn't going to help the project along. Alright, that'll be enough soapbox for a while... Cheers Steffen.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
