|
|
Posted by Chung Leong on 01/02/06 21:55
Balazs Wellisch wrote:
> You are! That's the beauty of open source. If you don't like the way it
> works, fix it! On the downside there's really no one single entity to blame
> if it doesn't work.
It is one thing to fix a software flaw. It is quite another when the
problem is in the development process. The only way to fix it is to
fork--another beauty of open source I suppose.
> The life cycle of open source products are typically longer than that of
> proprietary software. Open source products are usually released when they
> are ready not when marketing says so. I think this is a good thing. It keeps
> the quality of software higher while maintaining more realistic user
> expectations. If it's in beta you should understand what you're getting
> yourself into.
I think you're taking a particular case and fairly generalizing it over
all open source products. It's certainly not a common practice to
release software with critical components marked as experimental. We're
not talking beta versions here. This has been the case for the last
dozen production releases or so.
> Sorry, but I don't think that's fair. If you had done your job you would've
> discovered any flaws or problems before a production deployment. It's up to
> you test your own setup. Of course, I'm not aware of the details of your
> situation, I could be wrong.
I guess it was my fault to assume that the software would work
correctly at the most basic level. Why, even the developers themselves
don't know if it works or not. I'm clearly a fool in choosing the open
source route.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|