From: Rasmus Plewe (rplewe_at_suse.de)
Date: Fri Mar 09 2007 - 20:52:02 CET
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 20:52:02 +0100 From: Rasmus Plewe <rplewe@suse.de> Message-ID: <20070309195202.GB11774@coredump.suse.de> Subject: Re: [suse-sles-e] Re: [Ocfs2-users] ocfs2 is still eating memory
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 11:05:28AM -0800, Alexei_Roudnev wrote:
>
> How long ago did we had servicepack for
> SLES9 ? 1 year and even more (we have about 20 kernel updates already, some
> critical).
According to the current schedule there will be two years between SP3
and SP4 for SLES9. I don't think that is unusual that late in a
product's life cycle.
Service packs are meant to solidify an existing product. New features
are not the focus. If you add new features, and more new features, and
newer software versions, and even more new features, you don't end up
with a service pack. You end up with a new SLES version. So, after three
service packs, there's only so much solidifying to do for SLES9.
Since the release of SP3, there have been 4 (four) kernel updates for
SLES9, not 20. And besides, your argumentation "there are a lot of
updates, which means the product is abandoned" is rather inconsistent.
> Looks as SLES9 is almost abandoned (again, manager response from
> SuSe - don't worry be happy - when I asked about it) .
Actually, the correct response would have been "please take a look at
the roadmap".
> Now compare with RHEL approach. RHEL4.4 is rock solid system. RHEL5 is in
> beta for almost 1 year, we have a lot of rpm's for it, but it is STILL IN
> BETA.
I'm no expert for RH. Are you saying that by the time RHEL5 is released,
all technology and all software will be older than one year? Sounds like
a rather... strange business strategy in the Linux world.
> Support is to make things work on customer's site. If something advertised
> do not work, it must be fixed with or without support contract, feedback
> must be taken with or without support contract, and people must be realistic
> about the quality.
I understand (and sympathize with) your point, but unfortunately that is
not the case. Software is sold "as is", usually not guaranteeing anything.
This is nothing special for Novell, nor for Linux in general. Instead of
fixing (non-critical bugs in) existing versions, companies concentrate
on producing new versions which don't show the defects of the previous
one (see e.g. IE6 <-> IE7).
> If you can't do it - use better beta programm, attract
> more pre-release users, attract community. It is truth about _high priests
> in glass tower in Novell_.
> >
> > Let me be clear, I think the SUSE products are among the best! But there
> > is no possible way they can stay that way unless Novell stops trying to
> > impose a closed source mentality.
The beta phase of every Linux product has become considerably more open
since Novell came into the play. So whatever the reference point of the
above statement is: it's not reality.
Regards,
Rasmus
-- Rasmus Plewe --- Linux Beta Test Coordinator SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg) Maxfeldstrasse 5, D-90409 Nuernberg tel.: +49-911-74053-644 fax: +49-911-74053-483 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: suse-sles-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands, e-mail: suse-sles-e-help@suse.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat Mar 10 2007 - 01:55:20 CET