Re: [SLE] Updated Software Management Test Repository for SUSE Linux 10.1

On Tuesday 06 June 2006 00:52, Scott Kitterman <opensuse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I would agree with that based on the list feedback I've read if 10.1
had come with a warning that critical components were of alpha or
perhaps early beta quality in the release.

You name no packages, describe no symptoms, provide no error messages nor
explain any corrective actions you attempted (ditto any successes or
failures.) Accurate and informative feedback is the hallmark of an educated
opinion. Sorry, but your rambling vent doesn't merit serious consideration.
To wit:

Although all new releases hit snags when they hit a wider audience,

The difference between a "snag" (presumably tolerable) and a "show
stopper" (presumably intolerable) varies from user to user and application to
application. Of course, if you were a professional, you'd already know that.

A "show stopper" for you is more likely an annoyance (or "snag") to me...
*not* because I'm an "expert" while you are a "clueless newbie" but because
I'm acclimated to the way SUSE distributions are installed and maintained.
From all that you've written, which is really oversimplified, exaggerated and
overarching, I don't think you're qualified to issue a meaningful critique.

the problems with 10.1 go well beyond that.

What "problems"? Can you please try to at least be a /little/ specific?
How is anyone to know that you didn't inadvertently cause some of your
problems? How are we to know that you correctly applied the patches? Where
are the details? Give us some facts!

My 10.1 system is working well enough until I can replace it with another

Oh, <sarcasm on> that makes sense!<sarcasm off> First you say 10.1 has
"critical components" that are "alpha or perhaps early beta quality" and that
it's shortcomings "go well beyond" the usual "snags" of a new release. But...
in virtually the same breath... you claim it is running "well enough" until
you "can replace it."

If it's running "well enough" (my interpretation: stable, no real "show
stoppers") it can be adjusted and tweaked to my liking over time, just like
every other version of SUSE I've ever installed and run. If this is beyond
your capacity or tolerance, might Linspire be a reasonable alternative?

I'm unwilling to risk that for further experimentation. I perceive it as
being to risky.

Too "risky?" I could understand such a strongly worded characterization if you
were running your business on an "experimentation" system.... you aren't, are
you? Of course not. You're engaging in malicious hyperbole.

In fact, in all fairness, you're really just checking out a 'new' (to you)
Linux distribution.

Where is the "risk" in that?

This is a clear example of you purposely leveling exaggerated and overarching

10.1 is my first, and likely only, experience with SUSE.

The operative term is "first" experience, which means you are a SUSE "newbie".
This confirms you are unqualified to assess it's quality.

I'm glad things are going better for those of you with the energy to sort
through the whole mess.

*Another* perfect example of exaggerated and overarching language; this time
delivered using a classic 'passive-aggressive' ploy: The positive opening
phrase lures the reader in by feigning sincerity and objectivity then the
unwarranted sledgehammer pounds the unwitting victim into the ground... sort
of like this: "I think you people are nice and I'm glad you're happy but your
distribution is trash." The only real difference is you've called it a "whole
mess" which, if you think about it, is pretty closely related to "trash."

My perspective is the opposite: If SUSE can deliver a "whole mess" onto your
or my and other's systems yet have it running "well enough" that most users
are able to easily run with it, the fact that you've ended up 'swimming
upstream' and giving up speaks a lot more about you than the distribution...
for whatever reason... no time, no patience, not interested, not enough
experience, having a bad day, whatever your underlying reasoning is.

I also wish nothing but the best for Novell/SUSE.

I honestly don't believe you. Your vague but shrill condemnations 'reek' of an
agenda. Is someone paying you to write inaccurate and exaggerated criticisms?

I would like to caution you as a community not to be to self-congratulatory
now that you appear to have turned a corner.

Who are you to caution anybody about anything? You're just a newbie, one who
has given up, to boot (pardon the pun.)

And "turned a corner" is *another* example of exaggerated, overarching
language. That phrase: "turning a corner"... in the financial industry is
widely understood to mean rising up from 'red ink' to 'black'... from failure
to success... which is very inappropriate "black and white" or "good" vs.
"bad" framing of the topic at hand.

The package management and updater stack bugs will not "make" or "break" this
release or the distribution. GUI package management and update tools are like
*icing* on a cake. They are easily fixed and maintained peripheral features,
not the core of SUSE's efforts. I don't care how many disparaging words you
choose or how many exaggerations you employ, nothing you can write will
change these facts.

10.1 hurt the technical reputation of SUSE.

In who's eyes? Not mine. In your's? Who are you? Why should I or anybody care
what /you/ think? Your sole contribution to this discussion is negative and

In my little corner of the world I know several people
who tried 10.1 as their first try with SUSE and dumped it.

This is called "grandstanding"... the sole writer attempts to bolster his
standing by claiming he's surrounded by a crowd of (invisible) people who are
shouting out the same profanities and pointing out the same faults.

The truth: If these people really existed and they'd really tried SUSE 10.1
they'd be on this list speaking for themselves and you'd have nothing to do
with it.

They will not be coming back.

Oooooh! Scaaaary! (Sorry, but raw and simplistic FUD is agitating.)

My impression as someone new to SUSE is that schedule is more important
than quality and all a new release means is that the calender says it's
time for a release.

You are "parroting" another poster's *hypothetical* criticism almost word for
word. This means it isn't an original (i.e. genuine) concern to you. No one
seriously believes a couple of bugs and a bumpy release will permanently scar
Novell's or SUSE's excellent reputation(s?). [How does this work? Does the
acquiring company with a sterling technical reputation assimilate the
acquired company's similarly sterling reputation? Or are the individually
sterling technical reputations allowed to stand on their own?]

I see little evidence of a solid understanding of what it means to test
something prior to release.

I see no evidence that you know how to test a distribution or that you're
sufficiently qualified or experienced enough to pass judgment.

If I wanted to download a perpetual series of betas, I'd just run Debian

Pure flame bait.

At this point, no doubt, a number of you are probably itching to tell me
how mistaken my impressions are.

More flame bait.

You might be right, I'm just trying to let you know how things appear
from the perspective of one reasonably technically proficient newcomer
to SUSE.

You could easily be a troll.... or a plant being paid to stir up FUD regarding

Flame away if you want.

Cogent and rational arguments do not qualify as "flames."



Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@xxxxxxxx
Also check the archives at
Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@xxxxxxxx