I have a question...
Luis de Bethencourt
bethencourt at gmail.com
Tue Sep 4 02:08:54 BST 2007
On 9/4/07, Cory K. <coryisatm at nc.rr.com> wrote:
> So I'm guessing you have nothing to say about the fact that the ML and
> IRC channels are what you guys make it? :)
> Hartmut Noack wrote:
> > Cory K. schrieb:
> > > It was talked about in #ubuntu as well as on UbuntuForums. We couldn't
> > > update the site, it was down. ;)
> > A site, that can be viewed in the browser is not exactly down is´nt it?
> > Also I must say, that I have a few sites myself - downtime last 2 years
> > about 10 minutes for a dist-upgrade. Of course you have more visitors
> > then the 10000 or so that I have in my logs/month but you also have the
> > infrastructure of an industry-grade IT-system so downtimes for days or
> > weeks seem kinda strange in my ignorant eye...
The problem can't be scaled. The bandwidth of the traffic of the
Ubuntu Studio website is huge, none of us has such an internet
connection at home. And that means expensive hosting services, too
expensive for volunteers. But we are working in making the web hosting
stable and solid.
Just remember how many mirrors were knocked down when Gutsy release
came out to appreciate the magnitude of bandwidth we need.
As Cory has stated the daily news/contact channels are irc and this
mailing list. And you are invited to ask anytime these type of
questions arise, as you have done this time. Unfortunately the thread
started with the wrong foot. But the questions you had wondering in
your head some time ago could have been asked in that moment as well.
The website is a more general based information and hosting place.
> I don't know what you mean. It was completely down. Its up now. (though
> we need to fix a bit) I don't see the issue. We have to fix some things
> before we post anything to the site.
> > >> Still I vote for a special Ubuntustudio-Forum also. The normal
> > >> Ubuntuforums are as unusable to maintain a fluent communication
> > with the
> > >> users
> > > Sorry. This decision was made to keep closer to the established Ubuntu
> > > community.
> > The Ubuntustudio-Forum was an integrated part of these forums.
> > Music-Production is not desktop enough to be of much interest for the
> > established users of any computersystem geared towards desktop-users. To
> > be perfectly honest: as a music-maker I do not feel home amongst the
> > vast majority of people that only want to know, how to connect their
> > ipods and how to play encrypted DVDs...
We keep the Ubuntu-esc way of doing things. I understand you feel out
of place among standard desktop users, and that is why we have a
Multimedia Production section in the Ubuntu Forums. If we had an
independant forum I'm sure most questions would be in the standard
desktop user line. The Ubuntu Forums offer us a nice filter of getting
that out of the why, 99% of the time people know to ask in other
sections, but still for that 1% we can and we do move the threads to
where they should go as we are admins.
> I'm sorry you feel this way.
> > >> as the Canonincal Repositories are inadequate to host all needed
> > >> packages in versions that are recent enough to be usable (Ardour needs
> > >> to be upgraded every single time its sources are upgraded by Pauls
> > team,
> > >> same thing with Rosegarden, Muse, you name it...).
> > > This is not possible as packages need to go through testing.
> > Testing is most important - that is agreed. So if one tests Ardour 2.0.2
> > he/she will find dozens of bugs some of them severe, that are fixed in
> > 2.0.4/5 - so having a more stable app in the repos would be quite okay,
> > would it be not?
This situation is going to change by the new Canonical technology of
Personal Package Archives. Just out of the oven versions of software
like you mention will be available in personal/team launchpad archives
(maybe Ubuntu Studio Dev Team, maybe ardour maintainer) as an example,
without having to touch Universe and all what Universe means/brings.
Testing is very important and this will help test as well.
> > > Blindly
> > > uploading updates is not the way. Also, things can take a little longer
> > > because we sync our packages from Debian.
> > Of course it would not be wise, to have a new package of Ardour 2 days
> > after every given source-release but in 2-3 weeks this could be done I
> > think. To wait half a year without getting the bugs fixed is no option
> > for productive users.
> > Whatif a crash-bug would be found in apache? Would there not be an
> > upgrade before the next official release?
> Though your reasoning is sound, its just not the way things work.
> There's a chain the packages must go through. If we build bleeding-edge
> packages it benifits less users than if that package was in Debian then
Trust we work to have users happy with the stability and quality of
all, just think YOU guys are the reason we do this. That is why it
hurts as when your critics aren't constructive but destructive.
Luckily this are exceptions.
> > >> So again: is there need for help? I would be honoured to give a
> > hand :-)
> > >>
> > >> best regards
> > >> HZN
> > > Not at the moment. We have things under control. Just because you don't
> > > see the work, doesn't mean its not being done. :D
We work in the shadows...
Luis de Bethencourt
> > Visibility is communication, communication is life - that is the way of
> > the web.
> > best reg.
> > HZN
> Just trust in that we have things under control. ;)
> Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list
> Ubuntu-Studio-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
Luis de Bethencourt Guimerá
<bethencourt at gmail.com>
More information about the Ubuntu-Studio-users