On 11/14/2012 07:33 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 09:44:55AM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Great - let's take something that people are using, remove that
functionality, and not announce it!
This is not cool; it represents one of my biggest frustrations with a
bunch of the "new and improved" ways of doing things. You track down
how to do something, it works for a few releases, and then it doesn't
anymore with no notice.
I don't mind this much in isolation— and to some extent its
unavoidable if there is to be progress.
I also have the experience and impression that Fedora often dismisses
use cases in the 'long tail' as things that "power users" can get by
twiddling some opaque config file or registry entry or hacking some
bit of code— this happens more often the closer you get to the
desktop, but believe its a culture which permeates the project more
generally than that. In isolation this too would be occasionally
frustrating but finite in baddness.
The combination of the two— that anything non-stock is subject to
constant and often undocumented breakage _and_ that many non
nearly-universal use cases are too non-mainstream to consider
supportable stock features really diminishes the value I receive from
using a distribution at all.
I was trying yesterday to formulate a question for the people running
for FESCo along these lines; also what they thought about:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4772133
However I wasn't able to formulate a snappy and non-carping question
in time for the deadline.
Still, I do believe it's something that FESCo (those elected and those
standing for election) ought to address.
Why are other OS and upstream decision/discussion int their regard fesco
problem?
Should not their focus be first and foremost on our own distribution and
our own OS?
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
