Debian flamewar (was: OpenOffice doc...)

[Derek Martin]

On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 06:26:46AM -0500, Neil Joseph Schelly wrote:
> >   No, it takes a **LOT** longer.  If the number of components in a
> > Configuration Management scenario is N, then the number of potential
> > interactions is (N^2)-N.  Think about that for a minute.
> I don't buy that.  It takes a LOT longer for it to hit stable, but by that 
> time it's ludicrously rock solid.  

Um, huh?  It strikes me that you said, "I don't buy that," and then
proceeded to agree with everything Ben said...

And so what if it's ludicrously rock-solid, if it doesn't recognize my
hardware?  Not so useful, regardless of how stable it may be...

> This assumes they are too slow, but I don't feel too limited by that release 
> cycle anyway.  There's an appropriate Debian release for every machine out 
> there, 90% of the time.  

I can't agree with that, and just the fact that you said it suggests
to me that you're not a system administrator.  Ignoring for the moment
the lack of vendor support options from Debian (being not a company), 
most businesses have little tolerance for unstable software.  The
non-stable branches of Debian update far too often to be useful as a
standard desktop platform for support reasons at most companies who
have their heads on straight.  Notable exceptions for companies whose
business is directly Linux-related...  

At any given moment, both testing and unstable may be completely
broken by a recent change (such as a glibc update).  To system
administrators trying to manage 100 or 1000 desktop systems, that's
just unacceptable.  The stable branch isn't current enough to support
the newest hardware, even on the day it's released.  It too is
unacceptable as a choice for deskopt OS, IMO.  Debian isn't a good
choice for corporate desktops in "typical" environments, IMO.


> >   As soon as you switch to a "spin-off", you lose the benefit of the huge
> > Debian repository.
>
> Not true.  KnoppMyth does a great job of running my TV.  And they
> manage their own repository (in addition to the Debian
> testing/unstable ones and a few others).  If I really want, I can
> install anything from there, but then again, I don't need that on my
> TV.  If I needed the full repositories, then a spin-off wasn't the
> right choice I'd say.  

You appear to be contradicting yourself...

> > > Once more, servers don't need the latest greatest KDE and Gnome
> > > ...
> >
> >   No, but it would be nice if they could install.  At this point in time,
> > the current stable is so badly out-of-date that I can't even depend on it
> > to see most of the mass storage devices I work with.
> That's sorta what I said above, but a different kernel, even for the install, 
> is rather painless and can fix your storage problems.

Maybe.  Upgrading the kernel may require the upgrade of additional
support software too, such as for example updated NFS tools, raid
tools, and others.  It may also require upgrading packages that aren't
related to the reason for the change, such as firewall tools.  At that
point, you've got a maintenance nightmare, and you're much better off
just choosing a more modern distro which has what you need.

> >   In the world I work in, "just use testing/unstable/etc." is not an
> > acceptable answer.  I like to say that CM is basically taking the aphorism
> > "Better the devil you know" and turning it into a science.  When you're
> > deploying tens, hundreds, or even thousands of computers, you need to be
> > able to keep track of what is where, and when.
> Stable/Testing/Unstable are just names.  If you don't like them called that, 
> then call them Woody/Sarge/Sid.  

You're missing the point, which is something like, "If it ain't
stable, it ain't usable."  This doesn't mean that YOU can't use it, it
means that the management of an organization can't risk using it,
because if there's a problem, it could mean a serious loss of
work/time/money/etc.

In practice, so-called "stable" releases of certain software may be no
better, but you're never going to convince a non-technical manager
type that it's a good idea to use something which is not considered
production- quality by the people who are developing it...

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail.  Sorry for the inconvenience.  Thank the spammers.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20050215/a3bd7a62/attachment.bin