On 4/10/11 1:56 PM, rainer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 19:19, Ljubomir Ljubojevic<office@xxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>> If you read some of complaints, you will see some people quote and are
>>> offended and complain about "it will be ready when it is ready" attitude
>>> of devs.
>>
>> I think it's fair to suggest that those people should be going to Red
>> Hat and purchasing RHEL then.
>
> Not that this has not been suggested before, but:
> that doesn't have a fixed released-date, either.
> There's a series of betas and then, at some point, a new release comes out.
> (AFAIK).
> ;-)
> I think these people should change to OpenBSD. Usually, there's a release
> on May 1st and November 1st.
> Isn't that what everybody wants?
No, I don't think anybody wants the product to change or the developers to have
to put in more effort. But, is anything so good that it can't be improved?
Most of the discussion here has been about the closed nature of the process that
may be limiting possible improvements or the ability to add resources. It just
doesn't seem likely to change though, unless the people controlling the process
see a problem with it, and as long as the scheduled goal is 'whenever it is
done', how can they see a problem? If 'whenever' really is the target goal,
not just an unfortunate temporary circumstance, it should be explained on the
project web sight for fairness to users, though.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
