Mr. Summerfield,
You are making an assertion that is not borne out by the facts. The fact is that
somebody did release an RPM based upon our code (check the mailing-list archives
if you want proof). The fact is that since plex86 has gotten more publicity the
number of user-level questions has gone up. The fact is that most of the traffic
on this list concerning RPM's has been about why we don't have any RPM's released,
officially, on our web site. The fact is that this is still alpha-quality code,
not yet fodder for an RPM release--or even another CVS snapshot. The fact is that
even if there were an RPM for the people asking user-level questions, it would not
help them. In fact, it might make support more difficult by muddling important
issues in the already raging battle between the distributions of LINUX--a battle
those of us who have been here for a while agreed not to fight back in mid 2000.
(As a side note, many of the questions have been about the config files, and about
the disk images--or the lack thereof. These are not issues that an RPM could fix
unless it included a disk image containing the OS you wish to install--which is
clearly outside of the liberties allowed by law here in the US--and last time
I checked, in Europe also; unless that OS was LINUX.....)
Those of us on the project who have been working on it since the begining
understand the wish to have a readily user-accessible package available, but this
is not the time. Please respect our decision. When it is felt by the majority in
the group, and by the developers, that plex86 is ready for an RPM, *.deb, or *.tgz
(package or tarball) release, we will do so. Until then we are keeping the code
up on CVS for development purposes.
Can you deliver a clear and pointed argument as to if--and if so why--what we are
doing is somehow fundamentally wrong?
John Summerfield wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > If RPMs are released, we'll only see and increase in these questions,
> > and the signal to noise ratio of this list will grow to the point
> > where we'll need a separate user list and developer list.
>
> When RPMs were released for user-mode-linux, there were about four messages
> about it (mostly because there was no source rpm). The impact on the traffic
> was negligible.
>
> There has been more traffic because there are no rpms than there would be if
> they existed.
>
> --
> Cheers
> John Summerfield
> http://www2.ami.com.au/ for OS/2 & linux information.
> Configuration, networking, combined IBM ftpsites index.
>
> Microsoft's most solid OS: http://www.geocities.com/rcwoolley/
>
> Note: mail delivered to me is deemed to be intended for me, for my disposition.
--
Drew Northup, N1XIM
