> like maybe there's some round hole/square peg going on here. Fedora, > almost by definition, will be bleeding edge and therefore, somewhat > buggy. But, really, our version of "buggy" is *so* much better than I > deal with as regards most closed source commercial code, it's not even > funny. This is the "Its ok to torture people providing we do it a bit less than the bad guys" argument. I don't buy it. Fedora should aspire to quality. Yes being leading edge means it'll be a bit rougher unavoidably and it's always going to hit a few "doh" cases that look really silly and got missed. Yes if you want a quite life you should be running Centos. That doesn't mean Fedora should be sloppy because once your bugginess passes a certain point it becomes impossible to work with. Every time you try and fix something it breaks somewhere else. Fedora is a long way from that at the moment but it's slowly slipping that way in F15 and F16. It's just something which in the normal order of things is going to create pushback and complaining which should correct the slippage. Nothing needs "saving" just a bit of process focus tweakage. > expectation that you're going to mod the installation to your needs. If > I wanted a "click next, next, next, take what we damned well tell you > to, and like it" installation, I would run closed source. Well I expect open source to be at least as good as closed source. So if the closed source can get 'just hit next' right, the open source ought to be able to do. It's not exactly hard, Even Ubuntu pretty much manages that one. "Just hit next" is a *feature*. It's a sign of good design, and of quality. It's also a really good stability feature because most users just hit next so you know which path to test the crap out of. Alan -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
