Re: [Evolution] Evolution release and major regressions, a longtime user's thoughts

[Art Alexion <art rhd org>]

On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 12:55 -0400, Andrew Montalenti wrote:
> Art,
>
> [reply below]
>
> On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 12:35 -0400, Art Alexion wrote:
> > While I am as frustrated as you with some of the bugs and
> regressions
> > that you mention, I don't think it is constructive, or even in your
> > self interest, to take such a scolding and tattling tone with
> people,
> > many of whom volunteer, to provide you with software for free.
>
> I certainly appreciate all the effort that has gone into Evolution
> over
> the years, and have gotten much utility out of using it.
>
> Free software or not, there are basic standards for software releases
> and engineering that should apply across the industry.  Evolution
> isn't
> just in competition with other Free e-mail clients like Thunderbird or
> Balsa.  It's in competition with proprietary e-mail clients as well,
> like Outlook and GMail.
>
> The purpose of Free Software is not to provide "barely good enough" or
> "barely usable" software for no cost.  The purpose of Free Software is
> not to abandon all software engineering practices so that software is
> released in an ad-hoc way.  The purpose of Free Software is not to
> develop functionality in a vacuum, without considering users'
> interests
> and requirements.
>
> Many open source products released throughout the years have shown
> that
> Free Software can be *better*, and be *Free*.  These are not
> countervailing trade-offs.  We should strive for providing *better*
> software, developed in the open, and with source freely available.
> It's
> a complete cop-out to say, "Well, this is Free Software, so you have
> no
> right to complain."
>
> GNOME is a software community like any other, filled with users who
> have
> choices.  Users can abandon GNOME software if it frustrates them and
> does not make their life easier.  They can abandon it for other Free
> Software choices, or they can abandon it for proprietary software.  In
> the former case, you've lost a user, and in the latter case, you've
> lost
> much more than just a user.  So listening to these complaints, even if
> they do have a "scolding or tattling tone", is imperative for the
> health
> of the community.

Andrew,

I couldn't agree with everything you say -- except the last paragraph --
more.  I just felt the tone, not the substance, was counterproductive.

Not being a developer, I can't personally distinguish tough programming
issues from trivial ones.

I have raised issues on this list that were corrected within an hour of
my post.  On the other hand, there are issues that never seem to get
fixed.  My assumption, based on that divergent experience, is that the
lingering issues are tougher to fix.

I don't think software designed for general use should be allowed to
suffer from such deal-breaking problems, and many of these are for my
users.

And while I agree that the developers should take stock of whether they
envision themselves as working on a widely deployed production
application, and release accordingly, I think much of the blame may like
with the Ubuntu packagers, or those who decide upon which version to
include.  Outside of my work exchange account, I primarily use Kubuntu.
The Intrepid release prematurely included the not ready for anyone to
use KDE 4.  I have been a happy user of Ubuntu since Warty 3.10.  It
seems those that decide which packages are ready to include lost their
way with Intrepid 8.10.
-- 
Art Alexion
MIS
x3075