Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
Oh yes the Debian SSL issue. Hummm, let's see how the evil Ubuntu company maintainers decided to deal with this: (User / Sysadmin point of view) $ sudo aptitude update $ sudo aptitude safe-upgrade Oh my! It's informing me of this evil broken SSH keys issue and offering to re-generate any compromised keys for me. I choose yes and guess what? All fixed. Wow, those Ubuntu maintainers must be getting paid a whole lot of money to offer their community this kind of ease of use for free. I don't see why they would go to such trouble since re-generating keys is only a matter of a few lines at the shell... ;] I'm not here to put down the honest hard time and effort that maintainers offer up for free or for ridiculously low pay to produce high quality software packages that users of nearly any literacy level can use. It's just that in the bustle and hustle of maintaining a distro, the ultimate goal could lose focus amidst all the technical details. Linux distros are all about being useful and friendly to their user base. Anyone with other desires (bleeding edge, max control, etc.) can turn to Linux From Scratch for satisfaction. ;) The good thing is that recent replies from the maintainers were very informative as to the reasoning behind the version change. IMHO, that's the way a community discussion should be conducted, with facts, evidence, statistics, knowledge transfer that convinces people. Sharp snapping back with the "Wrath of the Sys Admin Gods" leads only to rebellion. Best regards to all. On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 1:30 PM, Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd at firmix.at> wrote: > On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 17:30 -0400, José E. Colón wrote: >> "Don't you think it is the developers of CentOS who should decide what >> goes in it" >> >> "...if you want to pay me to maintain it..." >> >> Whoa! I don't know about others on the list, but this sounds a whole >> lot like Microsoft to me. Definitely not in accordance with a > > No, basically every company thinks like that - also small ones. > >> "COMMUNITY Enterprise Operating System," eh? > > Definitely in accordance: If $MAINTAINER decides to not longer maintain > that beast for free (for whatever reason, say: no interest, no personal > use anymore), he/she can stop it. > If that service important to someone else in the *community*, that > person can take over and continue with the last .src.rpm (and with or > without the blessing by $DISTRO). > > IMHO it is definitely *not* in accordance with "community" if I simply > request that other do real work for me for free (and save my time which > I can spend for paid work). > And even worse if there are real companies behind said requests. > >> I know it isn't trivial in a production environment, but if you'll >> have to spend all that time building stuff from source because The >> Community has turned into The Empire, then you might as well switch to >> Ubuntu Server and enjoy the vast repositories and superior package >> management. ;) > > As if Ubuntu is not operated and run like a company - read: paid > maintainers in the core. > And even then happen things like openssl quiet recently ... > > Bernd > -- > Firmix Software GmbH http://www.firmix.at/ > mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55 > Embedded Linux Development and Services > > -- ------ José E. Colón Rodríguez Academic Computing Coordinator University of Puerto Rico at Cayey E: jose.colon at gae.cayey.upr.edu W: http://www.cayey.upr.edu V: (787)-738-2161 x. 2415 , 2532