my thoughts on package management

[Jeremy Portzer]

On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 19:32, Paul Iadonisi wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 18:07, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > Unfortunately comments like the one quoted above are virtually guaranteed 
> > to stifle input from anyone who fears their concerns might be too divergent 
> > from what they perceive the "silent majority" to want.  Such comments 
> > create an atmosphere that suggests that the spectrum of acceptable opinion 
> > is rather narrow, and that outside views are undesirable and unwelcome.
> 
>   Careful with your quoting, there!  Your 'snipping' made it look like I
> posted what you are responding to, but it was actually Jeremy Portzer.
>   Just so it's clear, I tend to agree that these conversations are fine
> on these lists.  They don't annoy me (though, I do understand Jeremy's
> annoyance -- just a different perspective), as long as they don't drag
> on too long with no apparent progress.  But that goes for any topic.

Right, and I should clarify that I am NOT trying to stifle any kind of
conversation, just trying to determine what types of conversation are
most useful.  It's just that I'm wondering what processes exist, or
should exist, to make a more objective test of what users really do
want.  Similarly, How does and should Red Hat communicate its goals
effectively?  Sure, we have the top-level goals listed on
http://rhl.redhat.com/ -- but how do those drill-down to things like
what kinds of packages will be included, and what things Red Hat is
interested in getting outside developer help with?

An example of this is the inclusion of tools like apt and yum in Red Hat
Linux.  Prior to the creation of the Red Hat Linux Project, many assumed
it would be a cold day in hell before these would be included, as they
threatened RHN, a revenue source for Red Hat.  Several folks vocally
asked for the inclusion of these tools, and there wasn't much response
from Red Hat, seeming to support the cold-day-in-hell view.  These
requests thus became tiresome and seemed like a waste of time on the
mailing lists.  But with the RHLP, the viewpoint has changed:  yum is in
rawhide and Jeff J. has said that apt may be coming if some issues can
be worked out.  So how can Red Hat communicate their viewpoint on things
like this, so we can sort out what is just a vocal minority complaining
for no use, and things that will be considered and are worth spending
time discussing?

--Jeremy

-- 
/---------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Jeremy Portzer       jeremyp at pobox.com       trilug.org/~jeremy     |
| GPG Fingerprint: 712D 77C7 AB2D 2130 989F  E135 6F9F F7BC CC1A 7B92 |
\---------------------------------------------------------------------/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20030724/547375f6/attachment-0002.bin