On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 15:52:13 -0500
Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1...@gmail.com wrote:
Let's not forget Loui, We are all human and make mistakes. A QA
process is definitely a good thing.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri 23 Dec 2011 10:42 +,
Hello everyone,
I was reading the package signing discussion that was going on over at the
[pacman-dev] mailing list
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2011-February/012483.html
and Allan said the following:
I think I know every distribution using pacman as a package manager and
On 23/12/11 20:32, Jonathan Vasquez wrote:
Hello everyone,
I was reading the package signing discussion that was going on over at the
[pacman-dev] mailing list
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2011-February/012483.html
and Allan said the following:
I think I know every
2011/12/23 Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1...@gmail.com:
Hello everyone,
I was reading the package signing discussion that was going on over at the
[pacman-dev] mailing list
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2011-February/012483.html
and Allan said the following:
I think I know
Thanks for the response. Do you consider Arch a production system or more
of a hobby project? Meaning more like a side system and not a main one.
On Dec 23, 2011 5:39 AM, Allan McRae al...@archlinux.org wrote:
On 23/12/11 20:32, Jonathan Vasquez wrote:
Hello everyone,
I was reading the
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 05:32:25 Jonathan Vasquez wrote:
I wanted to know what was he trying to say? Is he saying that Arch and
other Arch-like distros aren't serious distros that aren't meant for
production? I mean I understand that Arch is rolling release and all
that, but it's packages are
On 23/12/11 20:41, Jonathan Vasquez wrote:
Thanks for the response. Do you consider Arch a production system or more
of a hobby project? Meaning more like a side system and not a main one.
I have used it in production. But then again, I have quite a good idea
of what is happening in Arch Land
I simply believe that a man should know how Linux works, and not how Arch
Linux or Debian or Fedora works.
Basic approach, not distro-oriented approach. So I agree with Allan, you
can't be depending on a single distro, you need to know how to deal with
every single Linux system (major distros at
I agree. After a person uses Linux for a while, they start to notice that
most distros are pretty identical. The only things that change are package
names, package manager, packages used, directory structure (where do we
install packages, man files, etc), and the philosophy/goals of that distro.
Let's not forget Loui, We are all human and make mistakes. A QA process is
definitely a good thing.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Loui Chang louipc@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri 23 Dec 2011 10:42 +, Paul Gideon Dann wrote:
On Friday 23 Dec 2011 05:32:25 Jonathan Vasquez wrote:
I
However, I think Arch is a good distro for every purpose, from desktop to
server, because of it's usercentricness.
If you break something, you can fall back and most of the times, if you
broke a system component, it's your fault.
There's [testing] and maintainers don't push unattended dangerous
Am Fri, 23 Dec 2011 15:52:13 -0500
schrieb Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1...@gmail.com:
Let's not forget Loui, We are all human and make mistakes. A QA
process is definitely a good thing.
Is QA the thing what makes Debian so bleeding edge? *SCNR*
I haven't had any stability issues with Arch
Yup it is QA for Arch's model which is what I was going to yell you when I
started reading your response ;).
It depends how you implement QA.
On Dec 23, 2011 4:31 PM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
Am Fri, 23 Dec 2011 15:52:13 -0500
schrieb Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1...@gmail.com:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote:
Am Fri, 23 Dec 2011 15:52:13 -0500
schrieb Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1...@gmail.com:
Let's not forget Loui, We are all human and make mistakes. A QA
process is definitely a good thing.
Is QA the thing what makes
14 matches
Mail list logo
