Kim Leyendecker
21.7.2011 13:22 >>> Am 21.07.2011 10:16, schrieb Stefan Kunze: Basil, what are you talking about - what PR Nightmare could be created if you use an UNSTABLE unreleased Test Kernel in an UNSTABLE Test Version of an yet unreleased Opensuse Version. If someone uses M3 or Factory in Production, sorry that is their own fault.
It has nothing to do with "their fault". It just the same thing as with Red Hat́s gcc 2.96, although there wasńt any 2.96 to that time. And yes, it́s a marketing nightmare, and it hasńt anything to do with a test version or something like this. On DistroWatch, the test releases are recognized in the news section too, so, it will become nice when our marketing-team get "bombed" with questions like "M3 was released _before_ Linux 3.0 came out, how can it be Linux 3.0?" I know, it́s just a little mark, but Linux 3.0 wasńt released yet, and this should be clear in the announcement. Stefan Kunze Linux Technical Support Engineer EMEA Support Center skunze@novell.com Novell Making IT Work As One www.novell.com
Kim, maybe I'm not a marketing guru but for me it is logical that a UNSTABLE Prerelease of a Distribution can contain UNSTABLE Software including the Kernel. Do you really mean that even in Milestones only stable Kernel or other stable software can be included. In my Optinion this is handicapping development for marketing reason, and if marketing thinks that this is a problem then marketing needs to make clear that this is a unstable Release and not something you should use in Production. And if marketing does not want to use the Name Kernel 3.0 then say 3.0 prerelease or RC6 or I don't know - but don't suggest that it uses a stable 3.0 if it does not exist. In Case only Kernel 3.0 is used - the this si also a marketing Problem making false promises. I do not see any reason for development to hold back in this specific case . Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@opensuse.org