Re: Will Gnome _EVER_ be stable?

[stan <stanb awod com>]

On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 06:42:26PM -0500, stan wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 02:02:14PM -0700, John Fleck wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 01:06:08PM -0500, stan wrote:
> > > 
> > > I've seen this failure in various flavors of Gnome for longer that I care
> > > to remember.
> > > 
> > 
> > You've seen this before? So I'll assume that you've filed bug reports,
> > and followed up with the hackers to help diagnose the problem. That's
> > certainly a key part of the way free software works, with users
> > serving as a necessary part of the team by carefully reporting their
> > problems so the hackers can help diagnose and fix them. My experience
> > in reporting bugs has been phenomenal - these people like to fix 'em
> > if they know about 'em.
> 
> The only time I do that, is when I can offer enough details to provide
> a reproducable problme. Saying "My system broke" is not a useful bug
> report.
> 
> My point is that Gnome 1.4 (the stable version) should be beyond this
> type of behavior. If I were runing 2.0 that would be a different mater
> entirly.
> 
> But i have choosen to run the "stable" version in order to actually
> get work done.
> 
BTW, for those of you who mailed asying "Why Gnome never crashes for me"
I'ts crashed 3 times tonite. All occur when loging out, and there is a error
popup thta pops up fo a fraction of a secons each time/ One of it's choices
"wait for applet", and I maanged to actually get it clicked within that 
fraction of a second. Didn't help, when I loged back in all traces of panels 
were gone :-(

Sorrym but this is the exact same behavior that cused me to decide that Gnome
was not ready for real users about 3 years ago.

Any sugestiosn as to how to get enough informatioon to submit a _useful_ bug
report on this?

-- 
"They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety."
						-- Benjamin Franklin