ubuntu feisty experiences

[Collins Richey]

On 12/16/06, Matthew Carpenter <mcarpenter at intelguardians.com> wrote:
Let's clear the air here.

1. I have no beef with Ubuntu or Debian for most things. All in all,
they do a bang up job, and many/most of them are volunteers. I am
extremely thankful for all their successful work.

2. I fully understand the nature of Debian unstable and Ubuntu
development releases. I expect more things to go wrong than in a
stable release, and I have no problem using work arounds.

3. It always has and always will chap my back cheeks when anyone
releases a package that is totally busted and/or has dependencies that
make it impossible to install. I may not have the ability to fix FOSS
software, but I know what SHOULD happen before a package is released:

a. Build and test in your own environment
b. Fix any bugs you find
c. Package for further testing
d. MAKE SURE THE PACKAGE INSTALLS AND RUNS AS PACKAGED IN A NORMAL ENVIRONMENT
e. If you can't make it work at step d, go back to step b

If step d is not done, I find that to be unaccceptably sloppy workmanship.

This is only one package out of thousands in the Feisty distro. Either
the developers did step d in the other cases, or they are extremely
lucky that lightning didn't strike in more places. Users can always
produce unique situations (edge cases) that can't be tested in
advance, but this is no edge case. if anyone had bothered to test even
the simplest PHP program after installing the new package, they would
have a clue that the package is not ready to be released, even to
bleeding edge testers, because who needs a DOA package.

You are right that the Debian and Ubuntu developers could be one and
the same person, but the person or persons screwed up, plain and
simple. The package never should have been in unstable in the first
place: it won't run.

-- 
Collins Richey
     If you fill your heart with regrets of yesterday and the worries
     of tomorrow, you have no today to be thankful for.