Darren New wrote:
> Sabrina Kilian wrote:
>> I don't think, and I could be wrong here cause I don't follow GTK, 
>> that GTK has ever released a 'long term support' version of their 
>> library.
> 
> Dunno. I wasn't the one that first said "long use stable libraries."
> 

That was the impression I got from the blog, that he thought GTK was 
some sort of stable system. That's also why I put the phrase in quotes.

> It's also kind of odd that he'd be talking about putting Firefox 3 on 
> "production machines" without upgrading stuff. Maybe it's just me, but 
> either your system is working (in which case, why upgrade the UI 
> component) or you have someone's random desktop machine they're using to 
> surf random sites with (in which case why gripe that the package manager 
> downloaded a bunch of packages?).  I mean, lots of businesses (banks, 
> other customer service places, etc) use web browsers to get into their 
> systems, but why would you want to put firefox3 on such a box?
> 

Yeah, that boggled my mind as well. I put firefox 3 on my laptop, cause 
it wasn't doing anything. I waited till I was done with every major 
project and knew my desktop would be free for a week before installing 
it there. Didn't suffer any problems with the migration, but I couldn't 
have afforded the time to restore bookmarks and passwords if I had done 
it during crunch week.

>> All I read in the blog post was "I want to use a older distro that the 
>> package manager maintenance  crew probably aren't supporting anymore,
> 
> Yeah. Good thing agreeing with the guy wasn't my point in giving the 
> example. :-)
> 

Sorry, I read "this is bad and is a reason why technology B is better" 
as a mild endorsement of the bloggers rant.

Post a reply to this message