Is Canonical against Kubuntu (2): the bug tracking disaster

["Terrell Prudé Jr."]

marc wrote:
> Eberhard Roloff said...
>   
>> Anton wrote:
>> [...bug tracking desaster...]
>>
>> while this surely is not nice, may I remind you that we are talking 
>> about free and open source software here.
>>     
>
> I don't agree that this should be used as a defence of FOSS.
>   

I agree with Marc here.  Letting bugs just sit there for that length of 
time (over 1 year, basically saying "f*** you") is just plain wrong, 
FOSS project or not.  If bugs are not going to be properly addressed by 
the development team, then that team needs to just close the project and 
be done with it.  Don't leave people hanging like that.


>   
>> Afaik you did not pay for it and you also did not pay for support.
>> So you can hardly expect to get defined problem resolution timeframes.
>>     
>
> This is a valid argument, although not from the premise, imo.
>   

The premise here is that Canonical have said that they will continue to 
improve *ubuntu, and Kubuntu is part of the overall Ubuntu project.  If 
Canonical will not keep its word, then how is it (or its distribution) 
to be considered trustworthy?  Things were much better in the Dapper 
Drake LTS days.

I've been gradually moving my Kubuntu machines back to Debian for just 
this reason.  The Debian organization may have its issues at times...but 
the distro is ROCK-SOLID.


> I pay for Windows, or have paid, and have to deal with it regularly, and 
> the direct support is woeful. At least with mature FOSS, you have 
> somewhere to report things and await a response. This is far, far better 
> than the non-FOSS world in OS-land. (I don't know enough about Apple's 
> support mechanisms to comment, but I'd to know more.)
>   

You won't get any better joy from Crapple than you will with 
Microshaft.  The former are even more arrogant than the latter, and 
that's saying something.  Stick with FOSS.


>  
>   
>> Should you need better support, you might consider to use one of the 
>> "enterprise linux" distributions that are out there, waitng for you to 
>> buy them.
>>     

Wrong answer.  Such a flippant response of "should you need better 
support, go buy enterprise linux" does not help our cause.  The central 
issue here is that Canonical put themselves, by choice, in the position 
of maintaining a GNU/Linux distribution family.  Regardless of that 
distribution's retail price (or lack thereof), if they're not going to 
follow through, then they need to close the project, or at least that 
branch of it.


>
> Eek! Don't point the poor guy at Red Hat. That way lies pain unlimited, 
> at least, on the desktop.
>
>   

Actually, I do use CentOS (the RHEL clone) on two of my desktops and one 
of my laptops.  My Dad, a definite non-techie, also runs CentOS 5.  We 
both like it quite a bit.  Additionally, I've outfitted a school with 
K12LTSP, which provides a Red Hat desktop to an entire computer lab, and 
the kids loved it.  I'm sorry to hear your experience wasn't as positive.

--TP
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kubuntu-users/attachments/20090419/b087d07e/attachment.html>