[Mageia-dev] How will be the realese cycle?

Thu Oct 7 11:20:04 CEST 2010

On Thursday, 7 October 2010 05:21:37 Fernando Parra wrote:
+> On Wed, 6 Oct 2010 15:25:13 +0100
+
+> Must first be clear that Mageia is in fact a process of re - engineering
+> Mandriva. All of us here have perfectly clear that things are not working
+> as they should in Mandriva, and if we are consistent we should be clear
+> that there is not only a matter of management.
+
+Fine, but we still need to identify the real problems, and potential 
+solutions. I don't believe a problem has been identified for which the only 
+solution is a rolling release (of any kind).
+
+The fact that almost no-one on this list seems to have known about backports 
+at all doesn't mean that the backports feature is not useful, it may be that 
+it wasn't accessible enough to end users.
+
+> Moreover, if we stick to the numbers, something is not working at all well
+> with all Linux distributions, while despite all the virtues and benefits
+> of free software, the number of users is still very small . For example:
+> http://www.dudalibre.com/gnulinuxcounter
+
+[...]
+
+> Actually my list almost does not matter, in fact it does not matter at all,
+> because I understand myself as an atypical user. Although I am a teacher,
+> I have a degree in electronics engineering and other in engineering
+> software. And while my particular list does not matter, my experience
+> allows me to see quite clearly both sides of the coin (the end user and
+> developer).
+> 
+> With the clear intention of showing the point of view of end users, the
+> inexperienced, was how I expressed myself here. As developers continually
+> forget that is what the user wants and focus on what we need.
+> 
+> I find it obvious that the purpose of a distribution is not to develop
+> everyday applications, however its purpose is to provide the framework on
+> which you can run the latter.
+
+[...]
+
+> What I do not like Mandriva model (and indeed of any distribution) is that
+> although free software is developed very quickly, once you have installed
+> a distribution, you must wait a cycle to gain access to new versions (not
+> just security patches) and also must pass through the traumatic transition
+> from installing any operating system.
+
+We have already shown that this is patently not the case. The only problems 
+with the current Mandriva setup are:
+-Identifying which packages should be backported
+-Making it easier for users to get backports
+
+> Beware! Not for me, and certainly
+> not for you, my only problem with that is time.
+> 
+> Let me explain with a practical example. A user needs with urgency (without
+> judging their motives) the new version of aMSN to use his video camera,
+> with the current model need to wait for the new operating system version
+> and then install it completely. And to make matters worse this will only
+> work until MS decides to change the protocol again (as I read he has done
+> countless times).
+
+amsn is regularly backported or sent to updates for MS protocol changes.
+
+> Assume that a user, who never pass from being a mere user of basic services
+> will even try to understand that is the backports repository or cocker or
+> anything similar, is at best naive.
+
+So, how would they get updated software on a different platform?
+
+> I do work continuously with such people, and I have made clear they want
+> solutions as simple as giving a couple of clicks to solve this type of
+> situation.
+
+Start->Tools->System Tools->Configure your Computer->Install/Remove software-
+>Click first dropdown box and choose backports
+
+Now, maybe the user interface needs to be improved. For example, maybe there 
+should be no dropdown box, but instead when searching for a package by name, 
+it should show you all the versions:
+
+============================================================================
+Find: | digikam         | In: ->Graphical applications   |By: ->Package Name
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+Package|                |Status                          | Action          
++digikam                |Security update recommended     |Update            |
+- 1.3.0-1mdv            |Installed                       |Uninstall         |
+- 1.3.0-1.1mdv          |Security Update                 |Update            |
+- 1.4.0-4mdv            |Unsupported upgrade (backport)  |Upgrade           |
+
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+digikam - A KDE ........
+
+=============================================================================
+
+
+Alternatively, maybe a "What's new" view?
+
+Maybe a rating/voting/popularity system should be available, however in the 
+past people had complained about privacy issues, which I think may have 
+resulted in little effort being put into completion of drakstats.
+
+So, maybe a web site should also be developed, which allows users to also 
+access package rating information, and which provides some kind of 
+installation feature.
+
+> I do not use any IM service, personally I find abhorrent subject, like many
+> other modern gadgets, but not going to close my eyes to the reality of
+> their continued use.
+
+Well, using an IM service with a non-standardised protocol belongs in the age 
+of proprietary network services.
+
+GoogleTalk and Facebook both support XMPP, a standardised protocol ...
+
+(I use IM a lot, but don't have an MSN account).
+
+> Without being interpreted as an offence, for the same reasons, I think your
+> own list is not important. The only list that should matter is that
+> determined by a reliable and time hopefully. That list that reflects what
+> the needs of end users.
+
+The point is that there probably can't ever be a definitive list. We need to 
+make it easier to get information on what users desire to the people who can 
+provide it to them.
+
+For example, I *know* some people use openldap backports, but besides other 
+Mandriva contributors, no Mandriva user has ever indicated that they want it 
+...
+
+> If we actually stopped to see the problem of Internet access charges, never
+> get to do anything for fear that the final product will not reach users.
+> If this really were a factor, the distributions would never have grown
+> from a few floppy disks, many floppies to a CD, 2 CD, 3 CD and now DVD
+> (Tomorrow 2 DV and so on?).
+
+There is a difference between making the distribution unusable by people who 
+most of the time have limited internet bandwidth, and providing a distribution 
+that is usable with limited bandwidth after installation but allows users with 
+more bandwidth to have more up-to-date packages.
+
+> > What if more people actually contributed ...
+> 
+> Again, without trying to offend: at this stage of Mageia try to think
+> collectively, at least in my humble opinion this is to contribute, do not
+> you think so?
+
+I think one problem Mandriva had was that users refused to believe that:
+-Mandriva was open
+-Contributors could easily improve the distribution
+-Mandriva probably already had most of what they wanted, and if it didn't, 
+they should do what they can do to help
+
+For example, many people complained about bugs that get no attention, but *1* 
+contributor managed to change that perception to some extent. However, if more 
+people contributed, more bugs would actually be fixed.
+
+Mandriva the company may have been a barrier to contribution to some, and I 
+think one of the most important aspects of Mageia is ensuring that 
+contributors know exactly what happens to their contribution, and knowing that 
+the financial state of a company does not impact the future availability of 
+the project to which they contributed.
+
+However, I believe that the way packages and releases were managed from a 
+technical perspective is better than in many other distros, and I don't want 
+to see us throw out methods that were technically sound, but were just not 
+known by many users.
+
+I don't believe that merely changing to some kind of rolling release will 
+improve matters for end users, they will just be more confused when they find 
+out that to install database support for OpenOffice.org, they need to upgrade 
+all of OpenOffice.org (taking an hour to download ~ 70MB), instead of just 
+being able to install openoffice.org-base (with a 2 minute download of 2MB).
+
+The problem is to make it *easier* for users to get new versions of software, 
+not to force everyone to upgrade constantly.
+
+Regards,
+Buchan
+