LinuxQuestions.org
Register a domain and help support LQ
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 01-01-2009, 08:05 PM   #241
ErV
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Russia
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 1,202
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 62

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman View Post
After almost 30 years I've grown weary of developers being defended. They are hired to produce usable products.
No, sorry. There is significant problem with this statement.
Developers that create commercial software are intended to create products that sell (which isn't directly proportional to "usability").
Opensource developers follow their own goals, which are some kind of mystery hidden from understanding of mortal users. Since I don't believe in working for free for the sake of welfare of humanity, I think that most of opensource developers creating their software just for fun of working on it, or they have their own unusual goals.
Even accepting user patches isn't necessarily first priority -> certain projects will require you "to become accepted member of community", which is to my opinion just a huge waste of time, when you can simply fix bugs, instead of spending time developing better relationships with community.

It's not how things should be. It is how they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman View Post
Require them do their job and start producing usable products.
If product is used, it is usable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman View Post
A significant number of free/libre developers now work under corporate umbrellas, so there is no excuse anymore.
There is excuse. Read license agreement. It is "provided as is without warranty of any kind". Besides, same applies to commercial software (even though you paid for that). So in the end you are either agree with the way software work, or leave it alone. Although with OpenSource there is a right (or possibility, which most people don't use) of forking or improving it yourself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman View Post
I'll answer your question with a question: Who drives these alleged project goals --- a handful of skilled developers or tens of thousands of end-users?
Both commercial and opensource software is driven by a huge pile of semi-random factors. Those includes current state of codebase, current developer's wishes, current user's wishes, amount of interest in software, and so on. Some factors has larger influence on one project, another factor might not exist in another project. All those factors collide, and you get some kind of product as a result. And then process repeats (as long as there is interest in software) because "software is always evolving". Personally, I don't like that. I hate evolution in software - to my experience software should reach finished state, when it is perfect, has no bugs, and works (for the next thousand of years) without changes. Unfortunately, this just doesn't happen, everything requires updates and patches.
 
Old 01-01-2009, 08:05 PM   #242
Woodsman
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 3,482

Rep: Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534
Quote:
Please keep in mind that the subject of this topic is "Slackware 12.2 is released Officially" and try to stay relatively on-topic...
Although I was referring to the recent flurry of posts, indeed.

Quote:
Developers that create commercial software are intended to create products that sell (which isn't directly proportional to "usability").
And software that is not usable does not sell.

Quote:
Opensource developers follow their own goals, which are some kind of mystery hidden from understanding of mortal users.
Ah. You are implying you are not moral?

Quote:
Read license agreement. It is "provided as is without warranty of any kind"
My opinions are provided in the same manner. And my poop stinks too.

Last edited by Woodsman; 01-01-2009 at 08:08 PM.
 
Old 01-01-2009, 08:30 PM   #243
ErV
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Russia
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 1,202
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman View Post
And software that is not usable does not sell.
Windows sells.
All software is usable, but people has different needs and priorities.
Anything that isn't - never reached development stage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman View Post
Ah. You are implying you are not moral?
Moral is a relative thing.
 
Old 01-01-2009, 08:33 PM   #244
Woodsman
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 3,482

Rep: Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534
Quote:
Moral is a relative thing.
Well, that was my fault. I meant to type mortal, as you used the word, not moral!
 
Old 01-01-2009, 08:45 PM   #245
ErV
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Russia
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 1,202
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman View Post
Well, that was my fault. I meant to type mortal, as you used the word, not moral!
First, this was a joke, second, I'm not actively working on opensource software right now (three last attempts to make opensource programs were not satisfying, although programs were created and hosted on sourceforge), only closed-source.
I meant that opensource developers pursue their own goals, and although common sense tells you that this goal should be "high quality product", sometimes it looks like their real goal is something different.

Last edited by ErV; 01-01-2009 at 08:46 PM.
 
Old 01-03-2009, 05:00 PM   #246
dugan
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: distro hopper
Posts: 4,976

Rep: Reputation: 1555Reputation: 1555Reputation: 1555Reputation: 1555Reputation: 1555Reputation: 1555Reputation: 1555Reputation: 1555Reputation: 1555Reputation: 1555Reputation: 1555
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErV View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by allend View Post
The only supported Slackware system is the full install.
Is it said in documents on slackware dvd?
It's in the email you get from Pat when you log in as root for the first time:

Quote:
Slackware is designed around the idea that the system should be a complete installation kept updated with any official patches.
 
Old 01-11-2009, 03:40 PM   #247
lucmove
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Location: Brazil
Distribution: Debian Wheezy, Slackware
Posts: 604

Rep: Reputation: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by chess View Post
Another operating system that I enjoy playing with is OpenBSD. Every now and then, someone complains on their mailing lists that OpenBSD does not have feature X or application Y. Invariably, the response is, essentially, that the OpenBSD developers make the operating system for themselves. If you enjoy using it, great. If you have a contribution to make, then send in a diff. Otherwise, just don't use it. They are not out seeking users and don't plan to stray from their overall design goals. I think Slackware is similar.

Slackware is not for everyone. Patrick and the Slackware team develop the distribution in the way that they choose. If you enjoy using it, fantastic. If a particular user feels it doesn't work for them, then fine -- they should use something that does work.
The big problem with your statement (often made willy-nilly by many users of this and that "difficult" distro) is that you seem to think you are entitled to speak on behalf of the creators and maintainers of the distro. Where is it written that Slackware is nothing but a self-gratification project? I am looking for it at Slackware.com and haven't found any words to that effect. In fact, I have found quite the opposite:

Quote:
What is Slackware Linux?

The Official Release of Slackware Linux by Patrick Volkerding is an advanced Linux operating system, designed with the twin goals of ease of use and stability as top priorities. Including the latest popular software while retaining a sense of tradition, providing simplicity and ease of use alongside flexibility and power, Slackware brings the best of all worlds to the table.
IMO, only half of those "top priorities" has been accomplished lately. Slackware is stable like a rock, but not really use to use. As if Linux weren't difficult enough, Slackware is often more difficult than all the other "big" distros.


That's also one remarkable difference between Slackware and OpenBSD: the Project Goals page at openbsd.org claims "Focus on being developer-oriented in all senses" and no wording that could lead someone to construe that differently. Also, I have indeed seen Theo de Raadt support that same view that you have shared, that OpenBSD "is just for ourselves". But I have never seen Patrick say anything like that. Can you point me to a reliable source that quotes him as saying so?

Last edited by lucmove; 01-11-2009 at 03:42 PM.
 
Old 01-11-2009, 04:08 PM   #248
Alien Bob
Slackware Contributor
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 5,379

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucmove View Post
IMO, only half of those "top priorities" has been accomplished lately. Slackware is stable like a rock, but not really use to use. As if Linux weren't difficult enough, Slackware is often more difficult than all the other "big" distros.
If you left Slackware for Kubuntu then yes, I can understand why you think Slackware is difficult. I personally find Slackware the most easy to customize to my own needs, which for me is the definition of "ease of use". When something does not work you can make it work. With other distributions (like Kubuntu) this process is not straight-forward. Yes, a lot of GUI tooling at your disposal there, but if something does not work, it is not easy to make it work.

Slackware's development, as chess indicated, is lead primarily by how Pat Volkerding thinks a good Linux distribution should be like, and to a lesser extent to what the core team thinks should be part of Slackware. But there is input from Slackware users all the time, and when you take a look at the history of http://slackbuilds.org you will notice that several of the packages that are now part of Slackware, had their origin as a submission to SlackBuilds.org.

Eric
 
Old 01-11-2009, 04:11 PM   #249
chess
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2002
Location: 127.0.0.1
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD, FreeBSD
Posts: 728

Rep: Reputation: 168Reputation: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucmove View Post
The big problem with your statement (often made willy-nilly by many users of this and that "difficult" distro) is that you seem to think you are entitled to speak on behalf of the creators and maintainers of the distro.
I thought it was pretty obvious that since I am not Patrick, nor am I officially affiliated with the project, that I was speaking my own opinion. I did not say, nor do I believe, that I feel "entitled" to speak on behalf of the project; that's silly.

Quote:
Where is it written that Slackware is nothing but a self-gratification project? I am looking for it at Slackware.com and haven't found any words to that effect.
I think you are being far too literal. I said Slackware was similar to OpenBSD, not identical. It's called an analogy.

The point I was simply trying to make, evidently without success, was that, IN MY OPINION, Slackware does not attempt to cater to every whim and desire of each user out there, even if doing so might bring more users. For example, it seems to me that over the years, there have been numerous and numerous requests for dependency resolution to be added to the official package manager. Time and time again I have seen folks complain about the lack of dependency resolution and say that they decided not to use Slackware because of it. Yet, that feature, which many users feel makes things 'easier,' has not been added. What conclusions can be drawn from that? Perhaps that Patrick and the other developers think dependency resolution should not be included for various technical reasons. Or perhaps it means that they like it the way it is and don't really want to change it. Maybe those are two sides of the same coin. Either way, it would seem to me that a decision was made to not include features that might bring more users because of reasons relevant and important to Patrick and the other developers. If my reasoning and analysis are correct, then it would appear to me to be similar to the discussions I see on misc@openbsd.org. That does not mean Slackware is closed to suggestions, patches, and new packages, but that essentially it is driven by Patrick's vision of what Slackware should be.

Hence the analogy.

Last edited by chess; 01-11-2009 at 04:12 PM.
 
Old 01-11-2009, 05:39 PM   #250
ErV
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2007
Location: Russia
Distribution: Slackware 12.2
Posts: 1,202
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucmove View Post
Slackware is stable like a rock, but not really use to use.
All people are different. If it is not easy for you, it is easy for someone else. For me slackware is much easier to use than ubuntu.
 
Old 01-11-2009, 05:59 PM   #251
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,274

Rep: Reputation: 587Reputation: 587Reputation: 587Reputation: 587Reputation: 587Reputation: 587
Cool

The development of Slackware rests primarily on the shoulders of Patrick Volkerding, with help from his trusted group of developers. Also, the Slackware community provides feedback here at LQ, and the developers and PV regularly read the posts.
For me this development model works very well! Each version of Slackware goes through a rigorous trial of testing before it is released as stable. Security fixes are quickly released when critical issues are discovered. I started Slacking at 10.0 and I've been impressed with the evolutionary path that this distro has taken.
Slackware will never be a perfect fit for all users, it is designed for the end user who wants to know what is going on under the hood.
Slackware works for me.
 
  


Reply

Tags
torrent


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Firebird 2.1 officially released LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 05-08-2008 07:20 PM
LXer: New Features In OpenOffice.org (Officially Released Now) LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 03-27-2008 08:50 PM
LXer: MonoDevelop 1.0 officially released LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 03-18-2008 09:00 PM
Slackware 12.0 is officially released Alien Bob Slackware 54 07-13-2007 04:32 PM
2.4.0 kernel has officially been released jeremy Linux - General 2 03-28-2005 05:16 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:10 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration