Re: [Cooker] Terrible Mistake: KDEArtwork / OpenOffice.org Documentation / mod_perl Exclusion
On Thursday 20 February 2003 4:57 am, Simone Riccio wrote: > well... i agree... > Whoa talk about signal to noise ratio! :-) -- Bret Baptist Systems and Technical Support Specialist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet Exposure, Inc. http://www.iexposure.com (612)676-1946 x17 Web Development-Web Marketing-ISP Services -- Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday.
Re: [Cooker] Terrible Mistake: KDEArtwork / OpenOffice.org Documentation / mod_perl Exclusion
well... i agree... Timothy R. Butler wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I just noticed that the KDE artwork package has been rejected for 9.1. IMO this is a very very poor judgement. As my associate editor noted in his review of 9.0, a distribution aimed at the desktop should have a selection of screensavers. Now, the last I checked, if the user clicks next all the way through "Mandrake FirstTime" without answering any questions, the system will default to KDE. Likewise, you prefer the KDE dm (or the modified version there of), so why is it that MDK is including screensavers for other environments (xscreensaver) but not for KDE? I don't mean to sound harsh, but I think this is a really bad mistake. Personally, I'd get rid of some of the fancy xmms plugins, and provide the more basic stuff first. Likewise, why is something as *critically* important as OpenOffice.org documentation being left out? Normal users need documentation, and normal users using Mandrake will probably be using OO.o more consistantly than most other applications. This is the kind of mistake that could hurt MDK's reputation, I think. Just a quick glance yields many included packages that seem somewhat frivilous compared to OO.o documentation: MandrakeLinux9.1-download-1 xmms-mesa-1.2.7-16mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-2 xfishtank-2.1tp-6mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xearth-1.1-12mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xine-plugins-1-0.beta4.1mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xine-ui-aa-0.9.18-1mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xine-ui-fb-0.9.18-1mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xmms-diskwriter-1.2.7-16mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xmms-more-vis-plugins-unsafe-1.6.0-2mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 mplayer-skins-1.3-4mdk.noarch Still other things make sense, but in a distribution primarily used on desktops, makes less sense than OO.o documentation: MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 php-manual-de-4.3.0-2mdk.noarch MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 php-manual-en-4.3.0-2mdk.noarch MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 php-manual-es-4.3.0-2mdk.noarch MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 php-manual-fr-4.3.0-2mdk.noarch MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 php-manual-it-4.3.0-2mdk.noarch And if Mandrake is server focused now, why is mod_perl-common being excluded? Another option would be to move certain -devel packages only onto the FTP site. Knowledgable users, those who might deal with those packages, will know where to get them. For example: MandrakeLinux9.1-download-2 koffice-devel-1.2.1-6mdk.i586 How many people actually ever even need koffice-devel versus KDE screensavers or OpenOffice.org documentation? Very few. In summary, I think MandrakeSoft needs to reconsider some of the ommissions. Things like Screen Savers and Wallpaper (kdeartwork) are things that are being HYPED as *FEATURES* by other desktop distributions, whereas very few people coming in to Mandrake Linux (relatively speaking) are going to use the XMMS diskwriter plugin or the xearth background. Likewise, if MandrakeSoft wants to be taken seriously on the business desktop, things like OO.o documentation are FAR more important than MPlayer skins. Telling a CIO that "Sorry, we don't include OO.o documentation 'cuz MPlayer skins rulez" isn't going to work (sorry for the over dramatization, but I think it shows the irony). In summary, considering that 9.1 is probably the most critical release in MandrakeSoft's history (IMO), I think it is necessary not to go and make the same mistakes that happened last time around. Stuff like kdeartwork was complained about all over the place after last release, and OO.o documentation could very well become a very sore point that tarnish's 9.1's reputation. Is xearth and some XMMS visualisations worth this? -Tim - -- - Timothy R. Butler[EMAIL PROTECTED] Universal Networks http://www.uninet.info Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Enterprise Open Source Journal: http://www.ofb.biz -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+U+i1K37Cns9gJ0gRAn7ZAJ4h4QoFk4+Opcl7BIdNEGqlXflx5ACgiCCc 9pNoFHczS+VOTIWkef+ANTQ= =uqn1 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Mandrake Linux - Postfix MTA - RAV Antivirus - mailaeb.aeb-informatica.it - Questa email รจ stata controllata. -- Simone Riccio A&B SpA - Gruppo DataService Via Renata Bianchi 137 16152 Genova 010648671 - Certificazioni Brainbench: Linux Administration, Computer Industry Knowledge, Computer Technical Support, Network Technical Support, Computer Fundamentals. - Per favore non mandatemi allegati in formati fuori
[Cooker] Terrible Mistake: KDEArtwork / OpenOffice.org Documentation / mod_perl Exclusion
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I just noticed that the KDE artwork package has been rejected for 9.1. IMO this is a very very poor judgement. As my associate editor noted in his review of 9.0, a distribution aimed at the desktop should have a selection of screensavers. Now, the last I checked, if the user clicks next all the way through "Mandrake FirstTime" without answering any questions, the system will default to KDE. Likewise, you prefer the KDE dm (or the modified version there of), so why is it that MDK is including screensavers for other environments (xscreensaver) but not for KDE? I don't mean to sound harsh, but I think this is a really bad mistake. Personally, I'd get rid of some of the fancy xmms plugins, and provide the more basic stuff first. Likewise, why is something as *critically* important as OpenOffice.org documentation being left out? Normal users need documentation, and normal users using Mandrake will probably be using OO.o more consistantly than most other applications. This is the kind of mistake that could hurt MDK's reputation, I think. Just a quick glance yields many included packages that seem somewhat frivilous compared to OO.o documentation: MandrakeLinux9.1-download-1 xmms-mesa-1.2.7-16mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-2 xfishtank-2.1tp-6mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xearth-1.1-12mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xine-plugins-1-0.beta4.1mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xine-ui-aa-0.9.18-1mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xine-ui-fb-0.9.18-1mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xmms-diskwriter-1.2.7-16mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 xmms-more-vis-plugins-unsafe-1.6.0-2mdk.i586 MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 mplayer-skins-1.3-4mdk.noarch Still other things make sense, but in a distribution primarily used on desktops, makes less sense than OO.o documentation: MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 php-manual-de-4.3.0-2mdk.noarch MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 php-manual-en-4.3.0-2mdk.noarch MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 php-manual-es-4.3.0-2mdk.noarch MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 php-manual-fr-4.3.0-2mdk.noarch MandrakeLinux9.1-download-3 php-manual-it-4.3.0-2mdk.noarch And if Mandrake is server focused now, why is mod_perl-common being excluded? Another option would be to move certain -devel packages only onto the FTP site. Knowledgable users, those who might deal with those packages, will know where to get them. For example: MandrakeLinux9.1-download-2 koffice-devel-1.2.1-6mdk.i586 How many people actually ever even need koffice-devel versus KDE screensavers or OpenOffice.org documentation? Very few. In summary, I think MandrakeSoft needs to reconsider some of the ommissions. Things like Screen Savers and Wallpaper (kdeartwork) are things that are being HYPED as *FEATURES* by other desktop distributions, whereas very few people coming in to Mandrake Linux (relatively speaking) are going to use the XMMS diskwriter plugin or the xearth background. Likewise, if MandrakeSoft wants to be taken seriously on the business desktop, things like OO.o documentation are FAR more important than MPlayer skins. Telling a CIO that "Sorry, we don't include OO.o documentation 'cuz MPlayer skins rulez" isn't going to work (sorry for the over dramatization, but I think it shows the irony). In summary, considering that 9.1 is probably the most critical release in MandrakeSoft's history (IMO), I think it is necessary not to go and make the same mistakes that happened last time around. Stuff like kdeartwork was complained about all over the place after last release, and OO.o documentation could very well become a very sore point that tarnish's 9.1's reputation. Is xearth and some XMMS visualisations worth this? -Tim - -- - Timothy R. Butler[EMAIL PROTECTED] Universal Networks http://www.uninet.info Christian Portal and Search Tool: http://www.faithtree.com Enterprise Open Source Journal: http://www.ofb.biz -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+U+i1K37Cns9gJ0gRAn7ZAJ4h4QoFk4+Opcl7BIdNEGqlXflx5ACgiCCc 9pNoFHczS+VOTIWkef+ANTQ= =uqn1 -END PGP SIGNATURE-