On 12/04/2014 08:31 AM, Ken Schneider - openSUSE wrote:
Why are these changes being forced upon us before they are production ready? Is it to get more bug reports for fixes because "we are the guinea pigs" now?
Don't get me wrong I am for change. I really do appreciate the change to systemd now that most of the hurdles have been jumped, bugs fixed and features added. It's just that we should not have been forced into the change _until_ they were done.
I've addressed this before. This is FOSS. This is not IBM or Microsoft or HP where they can pay internal teams to do testing ad infinitum, all matter of regressions testing, testing with every possible printer and add-in card. If this were MS/IBM the product would be "2 years late" and the equivalent of, say, KDE4.10 before the public saw it. But this is FOSS, so development is done on a 'when I can spare the time" basis by people with other jobs, volunteers who are enthusiasts. Testing is down by what might be termed 'crowd-sourcing'. If you want a product that works "error free" then don't use software; if you want it with most of the problems worked out, stick with commercial products and don't use release level zero. Software is never "done"[1]. That being said, I am disappointed here. A whole new revision out on DVD ... I would expect it to have been better tested along the different upgrade paths. Yes, I do a 'clean install' on a new disk and add /usr from backup, but something like .2 -> .3 I should be able to do 'in place' on an existing disk. What's the real difference? [1] Strictly speaking, neither is hardware, but software is more mutable in place in ways that hardware isn't. Often upgrading hardware means junking the old and buying new. That's one thing for a coffee maker; possible for a cell phone; inconvenient (thank you MS for not allowing simple swap of disk to new machine) for a PC; both inconvenient and limited for upgrading your kitchen and bathroom without actually replacing the whole house -- which is a completely different and very disruptive upgrade, to say nothing of being expensive; and of course upgrading your car. However upgrading by replacement the San Francisco or the Broklyn bridges or even upgrading them is a quite different matter. And if you don't think they need upgrading, just look at how much their context/environment has changed since they were built, to say nothing of the available technology. Changes in available technology are often a reason for change in product. I don't imagine we'd be running KDE on a 1985 PC/AT with a 80286. -- /"\ \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML Mail / \ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org