Re: [Cooker] policy, begging and mdk club (WAS: KDE3 in SuSe8.0 as off 22 April)
On Thursday 14 March 2002 11:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I do not think this topic belongs on this list, but since you keep > all going on about it, here is my 2 cents. > > > I agree completly with mdks policy not to put KDE3.0 in main distro. > BUT > > I fail to understand why packages like KDE3 and moz 0.9.9 are not > build for members of the mandrake club. Maybe, time? Don't forget we already said that KDE 3 packages will be available for 8.0, 8.1, 8.2 and Cooker. Please just wait for a final release. > This would convice many > people to join the club. As you can read in the press, some people > think mandrake begs for money because the club gives not enough > extra's. I think I agree about the not enough extra's part. Texstars > webpage offers much more to many people than mdk club and it is free. /.../ Texstar's Web page offers KDE 2 packages builded with objprelink. This is not a good idea at all if you want stability. Most of packages available on Texstar's Web page are already in Cooker or Contribs. Some packages available on Texstar's Web page are propriaritary software and require an agreement of their owners to be offered on such Web page. -- David BAUDENS MandrakeSoft - http://www.mandrakesoft.com
Re: [Cooker] policy, begging and mdk club (WAS: KDE3 in SuSe8.0 as off 22 April)
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 11:16:13AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I would be willing to package for instance freetype2.0.9 and maybe other > things for the mdk club. The packages do not need good QA at all because > users will accept they are downloading unstable things. Look at the amount > of downloads from texstars site. It's on thing to download software that ends up being buggy from a free website. However, as soon as you put something behind an area that someone has to pay for it, whether that is in a box set or on a website that you have to pay to join, people will expect some degree of quality. And I can just imagine the flame fest that would go on if people started having big problems with rpms they downloaded from the club. Where they are under the impression they are paying for them. Finally, I'm not sure that would completely compatible with the GPL. In order to comply with the GPL Mandrake has to publish any source changes (patches) they make to the entire world. KDE always requires souce changes for Mandrake due to it's different menu system. As a result they would have to publish the SRPMS for everyone anyway. So what's the extra if you can just download the SRPM and rebuild it vs being able to get a binary rpm? While it would make it easier it would significantly decrease the value of the "extra" if it wasn't "exclusive". -- Ben Reser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://ben.reser.org What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy? - Ghandi
[Cooker] policy, begging and mdk club (WAS: KDE3 in SuSe8.0 as off 22 April)
I do not think this topic belongs on this list, but since you keep all going on about it, here is my 2 cents. I agree completly with mdks policy not to put KDE3.0 in main distro. BUT I fail to understand why packages like KDE3 and moz 0.9.9 are not build for members of the mandrake club. This would convice many people to join the club. As you can read in the press, some people think mandrake begs for money because the club gives not enough extra's. I think I agree about the not enough extra's part. Texstars webpage offers much more to many people than mdk club and it is free. I would be willing to package for instance freetype2.0.9 and maybe other things for the mdk club. The packages do not need good QA at all because users will accept they are downloading unstable things. Look at the amount of downloads from texstars site. This would definatly convince more people to join the club and bring in the needed money. Danny On 13 Mar 2002, Liam R. E. Quin wrote: > On Thu, 2002-03-14 at 00:50, Luc Roseberry wrote: > > So, will I buy SuSE? Maybe just to have a look at KDE3. > > Would I buy Mandrake 8.2 with a choice of KDE3 and KDE2.2 (one or the > > other at install time but not both)? YES (even with KDE3rc2)! > > I think it is the same with gnome 2, and with mozilla 0,99 -- there will > always be things released just as the gold master CDs are being sent > for duplication. > > After installing Mandrake cooker last night from an ftp mirror, I can > say I think it's set for great reviews. > > As for installing after the fact - Software Manager generally makes this > easy, if you have enough bandwidth. > > Let's not be to down on people who have put a lot of work into making > a really good Linux distribution just because a new version of some > package is released at the last minute, too late for inclusion. > > Liam > >
