Ass this thread does not seem to be about a specific technical problem/question, but about the general question how openSUSE is tested and made available for release, it will be moved to General Chitchat and is CLOSED for the moment.
Moved from Looking for something ther then support and open again.
On 2014-09-19 10:16, hcvv wrote:
>
> hcvv;2665252 Wrote:
>> Ass this thread does not seem to be about a specific technical
>> problem/question, but about the general question how openSUSE is tested
>> and made available for release, it will be moved to General Chitchat
>> and is CLOSED for the moment.
> Moved from Looking for something ther then support and open again.
Thanks.
On 2014-09-19 09:36, venember wrote:
> Dear Miuku,
>
> Miuku;2665186 Wrote:
>> We understand your problem however you do not seem to understand what
>> I’m trying to explain to you, so I’ll try this once more:
>> … openSUSE guys just package the software and slap it together - many
>> of the problems you describe are not in any way related to the
>> distribution itself, the problems lie much further upstream - for
>> example the developers of Apache have their own error codes as do KDE
>> guys and so forth. If you really want to improve it - go complain to
>> THEM.
>
> Maybe. But if you buy a coat, you do not complain at the supporter who
> send the button to the coat but the at coat distributor. Or if you have
> a dinner at home and the meal is not delicious your wife do not send you
> to the market to complain to the parsley seller… but if you are wise
> enough do not complain… 
>
> Back to the beginning:
>
> My problem was purely that there are much more errors in the SuSE than
> were before. The main answers are:
> 1. I became stupid and irresponsible, the statement is not true.
> 2. The problem is real.
>
> I asked (and proposed) some thing which are able to improve the system
> quality, these and the answers are, if we supposed the second
> alternative:
> 1. Will you bring back the legacy and useful tools to help to users like
> me? No.
> 2. Would you extend and improve the testing mechanism of the distro? No.
> 3. Could you ask/force the supporters to improve their program’s error
> handling? No.
> 4. Would you plan periodically launched SP or something to decrease the
> count of errors between two distros? No.
> The answers globally: repair YOU, if you can, we can not be responsible
> for anything.
>
> Then? What would you do if you were me?
Back to the beginning:
The main question is rather “What will /thou/ do to improve things?”
Like will you test and report and improve things yourself?
This is a community. You did not not buy anything. You want something
done differently, you do it. You can try to move others to help, or do
things your way - but they may simply refuse. Nobody has an obligation here.
You have to understand how openSUSE works first. And you don’t.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 “Bottle” at Telcontar)
> Maybe. But if you buy a coat, you do not complain at the supporter who
> send the button to the coat but the at coat distributor. Or if you have
> a dinner at home and the meal is not delicious your wife do not send you
> to the market to complain to the parsley seller… but if you are wise
> enough do not complain…
>
> Back to the beginning:
>
> My problem was purely that there are much more errors in the SuSE than
> were before. The main answers are:
> 1. I became stupid and irresponsible, the statement is not true.
> 2. The problem is real.
That’s a false dichotomy. Those aren’t the only two options.
The third option is that you don’t understand how open source software
and communities work - and you are making the same mistake that people
who don’t understand how it works make: You want them to conform to your
ideas of what they should be rather than take the time to understand how
the open source model is different.
> I asked (and proposed) some thing which are able to improve the system
> quality, these and the answers are, if we supposed the second
> alternative:
> 1. Will you bring back the legacy and useful tools to help to users like
> me? No.
And the reason for that “no” is because nobody’s willing to maintain that
with the new tools. You want them to be supported? Volunteer to help
maintain them. Or, as a second option, help find someone who can. Or,
as a third option, understand why those legacy tools are no longer
maintained.
> 2. Would you extend and improve the testing mechanism of the distro? No.
OpenQA is actually used to improve the testing of the distro. So your
answer here is wrong. But open source testing involves the users
pitching in to help out. As a part of the community, the distribution
counts on users like you to help test it, and to report problems when you
see them.
Software QA isn’t a magical process. Neither is open source development,
but you have to take time to learn how it is done, because it’s not the
same as commercial software development.
> 3. Could you ask/force the supporters to improve their program’s error
> handling? No.
Again, because of how open source development is done - there’s no way to
force developers of components included in the distribution to do
things a particular way - not by force. You want things done
differently, don’t complain about it - get involved in it. Open source
development is based on the idea of a meritocracy. Nobody gets to jump
in cold and say “do it my way or else” and /not/ get laughed out of the
community.
> 4. Would you plan periodically launched SP or something to decrease the
> count of errors between two distros? No.
Again, because that’s not the model that’s being used, and you would
understand that if, rather than saying “this doesn’t conform to my
preconceived notions of how this should be done”, you took the time to
understand how and why things are done the way they are.
> The answers globally: repair YOU, if you can, we can not be responsible
> for anything.
>
> Then? What would you do if you were me?
I would consider that maybe my view of open source development is
incorrect, and I would adjust my view to match up with how it actually
works, rather than trying to force a well-established open source project
to conform to my expectations.
Jim
–
Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C
Beginning: I think it is very impolite and same as the first alternative. I am using openSUSE more than 10 years. Do you think I am totally stupid? Or you are a bit big-headed maybe? You are worse than your system. The pure problem: too many problems are nowadays (from my view) and I had to spent too much time with repairing them. And I CAN find and repair ALMOST all problem till now, but there are also any) instead of my different working area. So I proposed some things to improve quality, for nothing as I can see.
- I see. But when I chose the distro there were available (and useful).
- I don’t agree. If I see well, you you are testing this on wide environment with static methods (no with different hardware and software changes and complex, mixed error situations). But if my opinion is wrong, sorry.
- Always have to be a boss. I sent an error message to the KDE and they said the are not responsible for it, it is a distro problem.
It is a management problem really. The correct solution would be that they should send the problem to you and not force the users to go from one place to other. And do not have to force but would ask. - I see. But on my view is that it is only the simple “patching” and easily leads to a deteriorated system. And my opinion is you solve the unique problems usually on high grade but it is not always enough, for example in the “Evergreen” method. And if you change the whole system in every year then it will not be “evergreen”, agree? Or do not change anything, during the period?
End: again: the times changed, the count of errors are increased, it is my personal opinion (from an ordinary user’s view). If you have exact measures against my opinion I will accept that.
Best regards
venember
I’ll just leave my final opinion here; You are free to use something else or contribute to the project yourself.
Complaining here will not change anything - and that is a fact. You can scream and shout until the end of days but nothing you say on this forum will make any difference to how things are done. Just accept it.
This thread is CLOSED for the moment.
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 14:36:01 +0000, venember wrote:
> Beginning: I think it is very impolite and same as the first
> alternative. I am using openSUSE more than 10 years. Do you think I am
> totally stupid? Or you are a bit big-headed maybe? You are worse than
> your system.
You are starting to get personal - and that will violate the T&Cs of the
forum. Consider this fair warning.
You may consider what I said to be the same as your first option; it is
not, and it appears you don’t have a clear understanding of open source
software, even after 10 years of using Linux. Just because one uses
Linux doesn’t mean one understands the development environment or
community.
That you don’t understand it seems clear from your choice of words - you
don’t talk in terms of “we” - but rather in terms of “you” and “me”.
“You” should do it like this. “I” expect xyz. And so on.
> The pure problem: too many problems are nowadays (from my
> view) and I had to spent too much time with repairing them. And I CAN
> find and repair ALMOST all problem till now, but there are also any)
> instead of my different working area. So I proposed some things to
> improve quality, for nothing as I can see.
You selected a venue of users helping users to express this. If you’ve
been around openSUSE for 10 years, then you know the developers aren’t
here, they’ve got mailing lists where these types of discussions are had,
and where input you want to provide into the development and QA
process can be provided to those who take on those aspects of the project.
Instead of understanding that, though, you chose a venue where the
smallest number of developers participates and decided to unload a lot of
anger and frustration and directed it at a few people who told you that
you don’t seem to understand how the process works.
That also seems to indicate you don’t understand how the process works -
because upon being told that you’re not in the right place for that kind
of feedback, you didn’t say “thank you, I’ll go and discuss this in the
right venue” - you got angry.
> 1. I see. But when I chose the distro there were available (and useful).
I’m afraid this doesn’t make any sense to me at all. The sentence just
doesn’t track.
> 2. I don’t agree. If I see well, you you are testing this on wide
> environment with static methods (no with different hardware and software
> changes and complex, mixed error situations). But if my opinion is
> wrong, sorry.
Facts are funny things. Whether you believe them or not, they still tend
to be true.
> 3. Always have to be a boss. I sent an error message to the KDE and they
> said the are not responsible for it, it is a distro problem.
> It is a management problem really. The correct solution would be that
> they should send the problem to you and not force the users to go from
> one place to other. And do not have to force but would ask.
Again, this shows that you don’t understand how a Linux distribution is
put together. The GNOME project doesn’t really care if openSUSE uses it
or not, so if the openSUSE project doesn’t like something about GNOME,
the options are to modify it themselves (which means maintaining a fork),
or live with what’s there. While there are members of the GNOME project
who are also involved in openSUSE, that doesn’t mean that because openSUSE
says “do it this way” they’re going to - especially if Ubuntu or Fedora
say “no, do it this other completely incompatible way”.
If you understood how Linux distributions are put together, we wouldn’t
even be having this discussion.
> 4. I see. But on my view is that it is only the simple “patching” and
> easily leads to a deteriorated system. And my opinion is you solve the
> unique problems usually on high grade but it is not always enough, for
> example in the “Evergreen” method. And if you change the whole system in
> every year then it will not be “evergreen”, agree? Or do not change
> anything, during the period?
Your view may or may not be a valid view. If you understood how the
openSUSE release process works, you’d understand why releasing updated
release media really isn’t feasible. Every time a DVD image is produced,
it goes through an extensive QA process, so interim “service pack”
releases aren’t feasible because they would take up resources devoted to
the next release.
It’s different than some other distros do it. It’s different than the
way SUSE does SLE releases, even. But it is the way openSUSE does it.
Don’t like it? Well, you can enter a request in openFATE to change it,
but I wouldn’t count on the years of experience behind doing it the way
it’s being done now to read that request and say “yeah, we’ve been doing
it wrong all along - we’re going to change it because this one person
tells us they want it done as an SP instead”.
> End: again: the times changed, the count of errors are increased, it is
> my personal opinion (from an ordinary user’s view). If you have exact
> measures against my opinion I will accept that.
Software is complex. Linux distributions are complex projects. Are
there going to be errors as complexity increases? You bet. But if we
held up releases until the point the issue count were reduced to 0, we’d
be waiting forever for a release (and I mean literally forever, not
“forever” as is used when it takes 15 seconds to load something that
should take 2 seconds) because you never get to that point when it
comes to complex software development.
You can accept that, or you can reject that. Whether you do or not,
though, doesn’t change the factual nature of that information.
Jim
Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C