From: Rasmus Plewe (rplewe_at_suse.de)
Date: Sat Mar 10 2007 - 09:39:11 CET
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 09:39:11 +0100 From: Rasmus Plewe <rplewe@suse.de> Message-ID: <20070310083911.GA6458@coredump.suse.de> Subject: Re: [suse-sles-e] Re: [Ocfs2-users] ocfs2 is still eating memory
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 03:32:36PM -0800, Alexei Roudnev wrote:
>
> Your schedule is not our concern. If you see so many changes, and see system
> now extremely stable, you SHOULD
> adapt your schedule and do not follow it blindly.
SLES10 was delayed for two months for exactly this reason.
> I did not counted all
> changes, but I know for sure that many options, such as OCFSv2, can't be
> used in SP3 at all, and are very solid today (I'll check # of kernels, I
> remember more then 4).
1. Thu, 21 Dec
(http://www.novell.com/linux/security/advisories/2006_79_kernel.html)
2. 28 Sep 2006
(http://www.novell.com/linux/security/advisories/2006_57_kernel.html)
3. 11 Aug 2006
(http://www.novell.com/linux/security/advisories/2006_47_kernel.html)
4. 31 May 2006
(http://www.novell.com/linux/security/advisories/2006-05-31.html)
Perhaps you mix it up with kernel updates for other products?
> > > 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.
>
> Servers don't require bloody edge software, they require rock solid software.
You're complaining that SLES9 does not run with new Dell servers. Now
please make up your mind: Do you need new software (drivers, in this
case) or not?
What you are requesting is new software that is rock solid. The place
for this is the new product, not the old one.
> RHEL5 is available for download and for use today,
> just as SLES10 available. Difference is that SuSe offers to be a _rock
> solid_ while it is not yet (as a firts release of any Novell system), while
> RHEL release promise to be a rock solid, using all software for a long time
> available during the beta (I dont know how long do they have it, but RHEL5
> rpm's are available for a long time already, so people use it and tst it
> pretty well. I cant' renmind any RPM availabvle BEFORE SLES release at
> all...)
I'm not aware of major stability problems with SLES10 (the pain is in a
different area: the software update stack). And there are a one or three
other things that don't work as expected. But when it runs, it runs
stable and reliably.
As you're probably aware, the start of the Beta phase means that all
features are complete, nothing new will be added. Given the rate of
hardware and software developement, a one year beta phase doesn't sound
too promising to me. Yes, the result could be more mature and stable
than what we are able to deliver with only four months, but you couldn't
run it on modern machines, and would get complaints about (some) old
versions in key software areas (php, apache are popular examples). Not
to mention that new technologies would be missing altogether.
Or you allow new features/versions to creep in during "beta", but then
your beta phase would be a marketing thing rather than a useful
developement phase.
That is the reason for building our service packs just like ordinary
products, including a beta phase. Because we do allow (some) new
features into it. Otherwise we would just have to bundle all updates,
perhaps add some other bug fixes we are aware of but haven't released as
updates, and be done in two weeks. SLES10 GA is not the beta phase for
SLES10 SP1. SLES10 SP1 Beta ist the beta phase for SLES10 SP1.
> I am not saying that RHEL roadmap is ideal - I don't work with it too much.
> I want to say that SLES require much wider beta and pre release testing and
> require other SLES positioning (for today, SLES9 is release and SLES10 is
> early deployment version de facto).
See above: What you want is new software, that has been (publicly)
tested for a year. Don't get me wrong, I would like to have that as
well. But I don't see a way to do it. It's either new, or tested for a
long time.
> And it definitely requires simple and
> easy to use bug reporting channel. I alone have too many bugs which I found
> and abandoned because I did not see how to report. (Esp. in yast2 - for
> example, if NIS have duplicate users
> you can not open user list at all; if package names have ++ you can't make
> backup or create autoyast configuration. Simular errors exists in other
> areas too).
In january, I posted an invitation to the Beta program to this list.
Part of this program is some bug reporting channel. So at least you had
the opportunity to be able to report bugs.
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 - 11:43:03 CET