Re: 7.1 Release Date

Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 03:33:48PM -0400, Lamar Owen wrote:
>
> > This upgrading issue is already wearing thin at RedHat (or didn't
> > you notice Trond's message) -- it would not surprise me in the
> > least to see PostgreSQL dropped from the RedHat distribution in
> > favor of InterBase or MySQL if this issue isn't fixed for 7.1.
>
> Why don't they just do a test, and then echo an explanation of why
> the old Postgres can't be updated? That's the way it works in
> Debian, and I don't see anything wrong with it.

Having done both Redhat and debian installs, I have to say I'm much more
fond of Redhat's process. In a work environment, you need to be able to
put the CD in the server that sits in the server room, then walk away. A
redhat install takes half an hour. When I did a debian install at home
it took days, mostly because the machine kept waiting for me to answer
some silly little question. Redhat has it's pitfalls as well -- overall
I'm pretty neutral over which I prefer, but there are important virtues
to Redhat's strategy.

> I can't believe that
> Red Hat figures it's package management is so good that it will
> handle all cases, and then blame everyone else when the package
> management breaks the packages.

As a developer for a GPL'd POSIX network monitor, I felt pretty much the
same way when some Mandrake RPM users held my feet to the
non-interactive fire for the RPM spec. But it turned out to be a doable
thing, and the install porcess as a whole is better for it. With the
wrong attitude, things become adversarial. When I got over that, I found
it educational and good for the product to collaborate with people who
gave more thought than packaging issues than I had.

Just my $0.02

--
Karl DeBisschop kdebisschop(at)alert(dot)infoplease(dot)com
Family Education Network/Information Please http://www.infoplease.com
Netsaint Plugin Developer kdebisschop(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net