* W. Wayne Liauh ([email protected]) wrote: > > If you don't want to run the risk of running into > > surprises, then don't > > run the development builds. > > Don't give me that *($&@#$^& PLEEEEEASE!
Let's keep things civil, shall we. No need to shout. > Only two, or at most three, more months to the scheduled official > "release" date (according to your "definition"). As one very > honorable person once said, only the paranoid survive--the key word is > "survive". Ok, and what is your point? We know when the release is scheduled. We know there are bugs that we have to solve before we release. We also know that there's still a ton more work to do (certainly in the Install space which I work on) that won't make the next release. > You can live in your own cocoon, but not many of us who have invested > so much of our time, voluntarily as well as enthusiastically, on this > stuff--and for so long. Patience will not run forever. I'm not living in any cocoon. I (and others on my team) have been investing *ridiculous* amounts of time on this stuff. Certainly well above and beyond what might be considered normal. Are you saying that we don't count as much as volunteers just because we work for Sun? I don't think that's fair at all. I know I've certainly given up large chunks of my personal time to get things done for the greater good. I know others that have as well. Would we like things to move faster? Sure, but that's not reality. We're going as fast as we can, but we're in a marathon and not a sprint. > A poorly packaged "release" (or "build" if you insist on the exact > wording) is an opportunity (for greater extent of debugging) lost. If The whole *point* of releasing development snapshots (builds) is so that we can in fact get external debugging assistance (among other things). If we didn't want that we wouldn't bother releasing the bi-weekly builds and just be done with it. > the development team is short on hands, ostensibly due to RIFs, then > perhaps someone in control could try to enlist some of us (non-Sun) > for the pre-release (i.e., release of a build) testing. Anyway, the > priority is to get the job done right. I am not interested in playing > with words. Please keep in mind that it is farkingly offensive to > assume that only Sun has a stake in seeing the success of OpenSolaris. And just how exactly did *anything* I say give you the impression that I think only Sun has a stake in seeing OpenSolaris succeed? That's absurdly not true. OpenSolaris will absolutely fail if Sun is the only entity pushing it. There's no one I know of personally inside (or outside for the most part) Sun that doesn't believe that. While you may not like the reality it doesn't change it. Development builds (which is what the releases in between the official releases are) are *going* to have bugs. Plain and simple. Nothing's going to change that. As I said, we try as hard as we can to make things as bug free as possible, but even the official releases aren't entirely bug free. As I said, if build 107 was as poorly packaged and bug ridden as you say and totally unusable why would we release it? We've held back releases before from public consumption for just that reason. -- Glenn _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
