Re: Caution! RANT: Re: [Evolution] exchange connector on Fedora core1

[Chris Toshok <toshok ximian com>]

Out of date = easier to track for a proprietary product.

It's not that it's difficult to build connector for a particular
distribution, it's the fact that it's difficult to support.

anything branded as "unstable" just isn't worth the effort.  Think about
it - unstable platforms may contain bugs depending on which version of
which bleeding edge packages you're running.  Do we want to expend the
effort to figure out which bugs are in our code and which are in the new
and exciting libraries that are in use on a particular user's system?
Would you?  Maintenance costs (in terms of man-hours for QA and
engineering) aren't trivial, and with a team this small are at a premium
to begin with.

Chris

On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 13:30 -0500, Christopher Ness wrote:

> On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 12:44, Tony Earnshaw wrote:
> > man, 15.03.2004 kl. 15.57 skrev Norman P. B. Joseph:
> > Agreed that RH 9 -> Fedora core 1. But Red Hat itself has said that
> > Fedora is for the birds. Red Hat offers nothing guaranteed stable
> > outside subscription, the alternative is Prodigy (?=RH substitute worth
> > nothing as far as the future goes), or similar.
>
> Woah, wait a second here.  FC is not "for the birds".  I will grant you
> it has been branded as "unstable" but it is just as stable as any of the
> other distributions out there who are innovating.
>
> If Ximian is not willing to support FC then they will lose a possible
> market.  It's that simple.  Is it really that hard for Ximian to figure
> out where files are located and build your proprietary product on/for
> FC.  I don't konw...
>
> RH simply wanted to provide something between windows and Linux/GNU (go
> figure) for corporations who are conservative and have done so by
> limiting innovation and improvements in their subscription versions. 
> This longer release cycle allows lazy IT managers to do nothing for
> longer periods of time.  ;)
>
> Personally I see this as a mistake because RH is ruining the innovation
> of their product.  They may get some kickbacks (fresh ideas/software)
> from FC but overall they are going to become slow and bloated (even more
> so some may say) and out of date.
> This move may capture some market share in the short term but the long
> term looks bleak for new features and exciting new developments.
>
> Think of FC as the young, hip kid.  Someone who is willing to try new
> things, while REL as an older person set in their ways, being rock solid
> performing the same task over and over again, refusing to change.
>
> I use FC on my laptop.  I am very happy with it and cannot wait for the
> improvements of FC2.
>
> Pick your poison.
> Chris
> -- 
> Software Engineering IV,
> McMaster University
> PGP Public Key: http://nesser.org/pgp-key/
>
> 13:17:19 up 4:08, 3 users, load average: 0.01, 0.06, 0.09 
>
> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
> See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html