maemo.org - Talk
Page 23 of 52 « First 132122 23 242533 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)
-   Jolla1 & TOH (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=56)
-   -   Update 1.0.9.n this week? (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=93830)

MartinK 2014-10-03 09:31
Re: Update 1.0.9.n this week?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by javispedro (Post 1441685)
You'd be surprised at the number of users Sid has.
There is a also a surprising number of people running Fedora Rawhide (and they have been doing that for years). :)

vistaus 2014-10-03 09:48
Re: Update 1.0.9.n this week?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegis (Post 1441676)
Neither or either. It doesn't matter. There is a trusted set of developers that have a duty to ensure a change is good and appropriate.. Jolla.
But then again: it's still a matter of trust. Now I trust Jolla (and openrepos.net), but fact is: nor you nor me knows anyone personally at Jolla, nor do we get to look into what they compile into system updates. So how do you know you can trust them? Same thing as with openrepos.net: you just do.

vistaus 2014-10-03 09:51
Re: Update 1.0.9.n this week?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by javispedro (Post 1441685)
So on one side you have things like Debian Stable which ship 2-5 year old packages and take years to "stabilize", and on the other hand you have rolling distros which explicitly have minimal QA only (a glaring example is Sid).

You'd be surprised at the number of users Sid has.

I'm not saying one method is better than the other, but there's definitely some significant number of users that would choose "MOAR updated" even if it meant "it crashes every other day". I mean, google for "$DISTRO 'unstable' branch does not deserve its name, it's actually quite stable!!!!"-like posts where you get lots of people with questionable definitions of "quite stable".

Note personally I don't care about this. I use Gentoo stable, which is still stuck at a gcc version not much newer than what Jolla ships today, and Qt 4.8 .
There's a way to solve the problem though: make the beta/RC system update process public. By which I mean: make it like an option in Developer Mode to allow beta/RC updates (with some warning or agreement along with it) so that users who really want to be more on the cutting edge side of things can do so.

coderus 2014-10-03 10:22
Re: Update 1.0.9.n this week?
 
there is already one, but only sailors allowed to use it.

w00t 2014-10-03 10:30
Re: Update 1.0.9.n this week?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by vistaus (Post 1441695)
There's a way to solve the problem though: make the beta/RC system update process public. By which I mean: make it like an option in Developer Mode to allow beta/RC updates (with some warning or agreement along with it) so that users who really want to be more on the cutting edge side of things can do so.
If Jolla were to ship a flasher, then that sort of thing would be significantly easier. Not having that means it's a much more complicated process, as messing it up (or more likely, us messing up) =~ send your device in for repair.

That's not to say it's a likely scenario. I think I can count on one hand the number of times I got my Jolla to an unbootable state while working at Jolla, and most of those were my fault. But it's still a valid problem.

Manatus 2014-10-03 10:36
Re: Update 1.0.9.n this week?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinK (Post 1441693)
There is a also a surprising number of people running Fedora Rawhide (and they have been doing that for years). :)
As a long time release Fedora user I take this was meant as a comic relief. ;D

Doing that for years, perhaps one hour at the time... :D

w00t 2014-10-03 10:46
Re: Update 1.0.9.n this week?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by javispedro (Post 1441685)
So on one side you have things like Debian Stable which ship 2-5 year old packages and take years to "stabilize", and on the other hand you have rolling distros which explicitly have minimal QA only (a glaring example is Sid).
At least IMNSHO both of those are pretty awful options. I shouldn't have to choose between "recent enough to do what I need to do" and "stable enough that I can actually do it".

I really don't think the distribution design scales well with the volume of software there is out there.

If we had a stable base platform (API/ABI/etc) to build on, then life would be a lot simpler, and we could simply let developers release their own redistributable builds instead of everyone trying to package them & manage the packages (often independently of upstream, occasionally with very bad consequences when a mistake is made, which debian's run into in the past...).

On top of that, market forces would also help to dictate which software required extra "stability" treatment (through LTS releases etc, supported by entities like Jolla that had additional requirements on top of "whatever upstream decides to release today")

But, this is all a rather scary divergence from the status quo, and the likeliness of it actually happening is questionable.

vistaus 2014-10-03 10:52
Re: Update 1.0.9.n this week?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by w00t (Post 1441701)
If Jolla were to ship a flasher, then that sort of thing would be significantly easier. Not having that means it's a much more complicated process, as messing it up (or more likely, us messing up) =~ send your device in for repair.

That's not to say it's a likely scenario. I think I can count on one hand the number of times I got my Jolla to an unbootable state while working at Jolla, and most of those were my fault. But it's still a valid problem.
Depends on what agreement you push forward. Palm with their webOS devices did repairs under warranty even if you bricked your device due to flashing. But for example Huawei with their Android devices doesn't. If you choose the latter, then it would discourage some people to flash their Jolla but that could also be a good thing because then only select people would take the risk. Which makes it worth it to open up the beta/RC testing to the public.

javispedro 2014-10-03 10:53
Re: Update 1.0.9.n this week?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by w00t (Post 1441701)
If Jolla were to ship a flasher, then that sort of thing would be significantly easier. Not having that means it's a much more complicated process, as messing it up (or more likely, us messing up) =~ send your device in for repair.

That's not to say it's a likely scenario. I think I can count on one hand the number of times I got my Jolla to an unbootable state while working at Jolla, and most of those were my fault. But it's still a valid problem.
*cough* one more reason to ship a flasher! :D

Quote:
Originally Posted by w00t (Post 1441704)
At least IMNSHO both of those are pretty awful options. I shouldn't have to choose between "recent enough to do what I need to do" and "stable enough that I can actually do it".
Obviously. But that's impossible to do unless you artificially hide the most recent stuff, which is what "surprise mentality" (ah, maemo times) companies do. Whether that is preferable or not to the "brutally honest" model is up to each one...

I don't think this is in any way inherent to the 'current' GNU distribution model, but rather inherent to every software distribution model.

aegis 2014-10-03 11:00
Re: Update 1.0.9.n this week?
 
Just to be clear, I mean absolutely no disrespect to the people that ship stuff on OpenRepos. It's just not for me. If my Jolla wasn't my main device then I'd experiment more perhaps.

I appreciate that people are putting their work on there simply because Harbour is currently too restrictive for them and hopefully that will change 'soon'.


All times are GMT. The time now is 21:13.
Page 23 of 52 « First 132122 23 242533 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

vBulletin® Version 3.8.8