On 20/07/10 00:22, madworm_de.novell@spitzenpfeil.org wrote:
Well...
the last time I felt the urge to comment on such things was the blatant failure of the rescue/repair system in 10.2 (or was is 10.3 ?). A fact that could have been discovered in 2 minutes by almost anybody. I'm bold enough to believe that even a reasonable intelligent parrot could have discovered it and rightfully started a squawking tantrum, biting the the next best person until blood drips off the "commit-button finger".
Maybe it is time to reconsider what is important:
a) Not missing a release date/cycle at all cost, shipping "crap" (before I get fried: this is an intentional exaggeration) to the users and move all existing bug reports to the next version. b) Letting the cheese/wine properly mature until it becomes really tasty. This clearly takes more time and more testers.
I understand that most bugs can only be found by actually using the software, and herein lies THE problem. I don't have an issue with testing a live CD in Virtualbox now and then, but that won't show most issues with hardware (fake raid controllers etc.). I and certainly most of the other casual testers won't want to trash a working system with "crap". Installing a reasonably aged release candidate would be OK I guess.
What is a release of openSUSE supposed to be? Cutting edge "crap" that needs a few "service packs", or something a bit less colorful that just works? Or is "it just works" monopolized by SLED?
R.
Wow, you've emptied the concert hall with this one "madworm"! :-D BC -- And God created Woman; and to repent He then created Beer. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org