[wplug] CMU installfest this Friday 7th Feb

[bgtrio at yahoo.com]

Well, I think there's two things you can say about this, to the extent 
that it's true:

1. If the dictum that "all bugs are shallow given enough eyes" is only 
true if you have enough eyes.  The beta releases get the obvious ones, the 
wider release gets the more subtle ones.  The conservative among us never 
deploy a .0 release of anything anyway.  In fact, although I have been 
very happy with the redhat releases I've used, especially 8.0, I wouldn't 
be surprised if red hat's strategy internally was to use the consumer OS 
as a testbed for the technology they want to sell in the more expensive 
advanced server, so the faster they can disseminate the new stuff the 
better informed.  The bug report data they get has to be valuable to them.  
</speculation>

2. Iirc, redhat was one of the first distros to move to version 3.0 of 
GCC, and while they're not always bleeding edge, they do have a 
reputation for being a bit ahead of the curve with their newest releases.



On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Henry Umansky wrote:

> So RedHat feels rushed to release new versions?  Is that why the .0 
> releases are so poor??  I don't think that should be an excuse for quality. 
> Why do they feel so rushed anyway, and what sort of updates do they do that 
> other distros don't that makes it so buggy??  Haven't used RH 8.0 yet, so I 
> don't really have any foundation for any valid arguments either way, but 
> anyones input would be appreciated.
> 
> -Henry
> 
> --On Monday, February 03, 2003 4:42 PM -0500 jsbillings at mac.com wrote:r
> 
> > For what it's worth, I've been testing the latest redhat beta, "Phoebe"
> > today, and it's rather nice.  It feels a bit more polished.  8.1 will
> > probably be a lot better than 8.0.... but Redhat .0 releases have always
> > been pretty poor.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 16:07, Alexandros Papadopoulos wrote:
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> On Monday 03 February 2003 15:21, Russ Schneider wrote:
> >> > RH 8.0?  Awfully buggy!  Most of the RH x.0's are buggy.  The server
> >> > where all my sites/music is located runs 8.0 and I can't stand it.
> >> > :)
> >> >
> >> > </2 cents>
> >>
> >> I'm with you, I'm beginning to get fed up with RedHat and its
> >> "I-did-it-my-way" mentality. Having said that, it's the only
> >> distribution that I've installed so smoothly on these laptops, and the
> >> most newbie-friendly I know of.
> >>
> >> So, unfortunately, this is what I know, this is what I preach :-P
> >>
> >> - -A
> >> - --
> >> http://andrew.cmu.edu/~apapadop/pub_key.asc
> >> 3DAD 8435 DB52 F17B 640F  D78C 8260 0CC1 0B75 8265
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
> >>
> >> iD8DBQE+PtoDgmAMwQt1gmURAvVeAJ9TStGtcHsqCP0rejqrx70NgQPANACffSmj
> >> N8wQexD7c8gToCmy6joNrJM=
> >> =6xXD
> >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> wplug mailing list
> >> wplug at wplug.org
> >> http://www.wplug.org/mailman/listinfo/wplug
> > --
> > Jonathan S Billings <jsbillings at mac.com>
> > _______________________________________________
> > wplug mailing list
> > wplug at wplug.org
> > http://www.wplug.org/mailman/listinfo/wplug
> 
> 
> 
> Henry Umansky
> hmust2 [at] pitt [dot] edu
> http://www.pitt.edu/~hmust2
> 
> _______________________________________________
> wplug mailing list
> wplug at wplug.org
> http://www.wplug.org/mailman/listinfo/wplug
>