[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: stable releases
> I wrote:
> >Stable clearly means different things to different folks.
> That's why we explicitly define what we mean by the term
> (and, in every stable release announcement, provide a reference
> to that definition).
The OpenLDAP team's definition is circular/recursive. You use the word stable
in your definition of the word stable, which makes the definition useless.
The rest of your post is (unfortunately for me!) completely accurate; it took
me over a year to get Red Hat to fix a bug in their pppd package, and I have to
admit that your time is better spent working on OpenLDAP than fruitlessly
begging for Red Hat to take advantage of your efforts.
I'll shut up again now.
> You make the assumption that if we were to ask, that 1)
> they would be provided in a timely fashion and 2) users would
> actually upgrade in a timely fashion. I don't think either
> can be expected to be true in general, especially given 1)
> most 3rd party packagers are volunteers and 2) users are
> quite unlikely to upgrade unless they experience problems
> (and even then, they'll ask before upgrading).
> But, regardless, any packager who does not want to
> "stay tuned in" free can just to update on announcement.