[CentOS] Re: gnome 2.12 via yum?

[Johnny Hughes]

On Mon, 2006-05-29 at 22:30 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Johnny Hughes wrote:
> 
> > <OPINION>
> > If you add the lastest KDE via the kde-redhat project to centos-4 ....
> > or if there were a project that offered to upgrade gnome from 2.8 to
> > another version (say 2.12) .... then you are no longer using centos.
> > 
> > You would have a hodgepodge of programs that are not really enterprise
> > stable, nor really designed to work together.  Not that there is
> > anything wrong with that, and Rex does a great job w/ the kde-redhat
> > project ... it is just not that stable on top of CentOS ...
> 
> IMO, it's pretty darn stable.  Are you privy to information I'm not?
> Or... perhaps simply your definition of "just not that stable" is
> different than mine.
> 

Rex,

First I want to say that what you do is great work.  I have used your
repo and I have had no real problems on a workstation install.

And I am sure my definition of stable is different.

To me, upgrading all the files that are required to be upgraded means
that there are several server packages and things I would consider
"Enterprise" upgraded ... and not just KDE.

The same would be true for a Gnome upgrade too.

Being a package builder, I understand that all these items are required
dependencies ... and they have to be installed.  It is just my opinion
that after that is done, the resulting workstation is really not CentOS
any more.

The sheer number of packages upgraded means that there are introduced
many issues that are not normally present.

That is not to say that it is bad ... just not what is tested.  I think
having a much newer version of qt and samba (just 2 examples) can cause
major issues with people who have custom software already developed for
to run on their Enterprise machines.

I also don't particularly like the real Red Hat logos getting back on
CentOS installs (as long as the upstream guys are OK with it, I guess I
am too :)

Again, this is not to minimize your efforts or say that the kde-redhat
repo is not good ... quite the opposite is true.  Maintaining the latest
kde packages so that it can upgrade all the versions of RH based
products that you do is very hard ... and the fact that it works as well
as it does is amazing.  It is a wonderful repo ... it just changes the
distro to not be CentOS.

That is not good or bad ... but it is certainly a more complex system to
troubleshoot.  All I am trying to say is this ... if it were stable
enough to deploy as the Enterprise distro ... then it would be in update
4 for RHEL 4.  If it is not, then the upstream people think it is not
enterprise ready .. right? 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060530/2ce9ee40/attachment.sig>