On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:54, Darrell May wrote: > just a few examples.... > > I think many of us listened to statement that said 'if you build it, we > just might incorporate it'. Unfortunately we are not seeing this happen. > Many excellent contribs await incorporating into the base iso.
Maybe so, but on this one, I've got to disagree - Mitel incorporated your updated "Workgroup" panel into SME5.1b1 (b3?) didn't they? It was a fairly simple update that didn't break anything by introducing it, so maybe that's why it was accepted - it required little (or no) testing and introduced no real security holes. > So we are forced download and add as an example, Dan's PHP and IMP and then > we visit e-smith.org and we download a contrib from here and a few from > there and then we visit my site and download a few more and we manually > install of the above and after an hour or two we finally have our new SME > 5.1.2 ready to go. *This* could be fixed by getting a definative HOWTO for blades supplied by Mitel. It's been promised to us ever since SMEv5 was released, but I'm yet to see it anywhere. Anytime anyone asks, we get a response that "really, it's quite simple, and the HOWTO will be available in a couple of weeks". Not really good enough when SMEv5 was released something like 6 months ago, especially if it *is* as simple as we're told. There are no clear guidelines for creating a blade that's not going to break anything, and (more importantly) the procedure to follow to submit a blade to show up as "unsupported", which seems ideal for things like PHP/IMP upgrades that simply require the download of a number of RPMs and installing them. -- Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives by mail and http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
