CentOS - May 2009 - [CentOS-announce] CentOS 5 i386 - The CentOS-5.3 i386 Live CD is released

Umm... is there any rational reason to only announce the CentOS-5.3 Live CD on
May 27, when it was available since May 19, and Patrice has updated the Release
Notes on the same May 19?

The CD date is indeed 19-May-2009 02:50 and I've found it on May 21 on all
the mirrors I've checked. I was persuaded that the only 5.3 LiveCD available
was from ScientificLinux, and I've checked with CentOS just be reflex. To my
surprise, 5.3 LiveCD was available, but not announced!

Also, how come it only includes FF 3.0.6? This is terribly weird IMHO.

Best regards,
R-C




      __________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your
favourite sites. Download it now
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.

Radu-Cristian FOTESCU wrote:
> 
> Umm... is there any rational reason to only announce the CentOS-5.3
> Live CD on May 27, when it was available since May 19, and Patrice has
> updated the Release Notes on the same May 19?
Yes. We had some issues with our mirror network which we wanted to
resolve before announcing the Live CD, so that the CD would be available
on all mirror carrying CD isos.
> Also, how come it only includes FF 3.0.6? This is terribly weird IMHO.
It went through QA before the release announcement, which also took some
time. 

Cheers,

Ralph
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20090527/3bc62424/attachment-0004.sig>

Hi,

On 05/27/2009 08:52 AM, Radu-Cristian FOTESCU wrote:
> Umm... is there any rational reason to only announce the CentOS-5.3 Live CD
on May 27, when it was available since May 19, and Patrice has updated the
Release Notes on the same May 19?
Like every thing else we do - its not released till its announced. And 
till its announced, it can change - be removed or modified or even pulled.

- KB

> Like every thing else we do - its not released till 
> its announced. And till its announced, it can change
> - be removed or modified or even pulled.
Thanks. It makes sense. It's just... the regular 5.3 was *not* posted (as
ISO images) one week before the announcement!

And it was frustrating...
http://beranger.org/v3/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/useless_chart_rhel5_clones.png


Best regards,
R-C



      __________________________________________________________________
The new Internet Explorer? 8 - Faster, safer, easier.  Optimized for Yahoo!  Get
it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

> Yes. We had some issues with our mirror network which we
> wanted to resolve before announcing the Live CD, so that 
> the CD would be available on all mirror carrying CD isos.
Ouch, didn't know that there were mirroring problems.
> > Also, how come it only includes FF 3.0.6? This is
> terribly weird IMHO.
> 
> It went through QA before the release announcement, which
> also took some time. 
OK. However... this is still ridiculous, given the dates when CentOS has
released FF updated packages:
firefox-3.0.6  = 04-Feb-2009
firefox-3.0.7  = 01-Apr-2009
firefox-3.0.9  = 23-Apr-2009
firefox-3.0.10 = 28-Apr-2009 
5.3 LiveCD     = 19-May-2009

Just updating 1 (one) package and regenerate the CD... how much would it have
taken to test the result? Note that the updated package was part of CentOS 5.3
since April 28 already. (Sigh.)

All right, nothing would change now anyway. But it's still ridiculous to
ship a FF issued in February 4!

Regards,
R-C



      __________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! 

http://www.flickr.com/gift/

> the problem in this case, is that the package should not
> have been updated. It would / should be the same as whats
> in the 5.3 tree. We prolly need to add that to the QA process.
I know that this is CentOS' policy -- to ship obsolete packages on the
install media, just to match 100% the upstream install media, so to match their
possible bugs, but not newer installation bugs that won't match upstream
bugs -- *but* this LiveCD is *not* matching anything upstream, and therefore it
should have had updated packages! (Of course, that's my opinion, not yours.)

The only way to install from a LiveCD is netinstall, so it doesn't matter
what is on the CD -- except for the kernel and base system, but not the X
applications.

Otherwise, used as a rescue CD or just as a normal LiveCD, I don't see what
would be the harm of using the official updates.

It looks like CentOS has not defined yet a solid policy wrt the LiveCD.

You could have taken some ideas from the ScientificLinux
LiveCDs/LiveDVD/miniLiveCD. Unless you consider them a "rival", or
unless you hate Urs Beyerle. For instance, they've added to the LiveCDs even
packages not in their regular ScientificLinux distro, just to make them more
useful as rescue tools.

I don't say you should have copied them, but at least to take a look at what
other clones are doing.

> your email client is broken.
It is not an e-mail client. It's Yahoo Mail Classic, the web interface. So
it's more of a platform. Broken or not, *your* e-mail client should accept
this kind of breakage. An e-mail client that only supports properly-formatted
mail is like a car that can only runs on perfect roads.


Regards,
R-C



      __________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! 

http://www.flickr.com/gift/

--- On Wed, 5/27/09, Ralph Angenendt <ra+centos at br-online.de>
wrote:
> 
> Nothing will keep from joining the live CD project on
> http://projects.centos.org/ - constructive input is
> always welcome. 
Oh. Knowing that CentOS is the most conservative from all the EL clones, I
don't expect 'heresies' to be accepted.

Should I switch completely to CentOS (that is, laptop(s), etc.), I should rather
see whether I could be of any help with other issues, such as CentOS extras
(e.g. how safe is to mix 'extras' with RPMforge with centos.karan.org
when one needs more software? mixing EPEL with RPMforge is *known* to lead to
some RPM hell).

 
> The problem is more that your client breaks threading, as
> it does not insert an In-Reply-To: line.
All I can do in Yahoo Mail is to preserve the "--- On date, someone
wrote:" line.

Thanks,
R-C



      __________________________________________________________________
The new Internet Explorer? 8 - Faster, safer, easier.  Optimized for Yahoo!  Get
it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

--- On Wed, 5/27/09, Toby Bluhm <tkb at alltechmedusa.com>
wrote:
> Niki Kovacs wrote:
> > Ladislav Bodnar a ?crit :
> > 
> > > Hey, didn't you abandon Linux and switch to Windows 
> > > not long ago? I remember 
> > > you making a big deal out of this on your blog. Or
> > > did you change your mind 
> > > again? Was the Windows world that bad?
What's really nice is that Ladislav, the promoter of FLOSS, is banning me
*by the IP* to comment on his DWW, although it was not me the most non-courteous
commenter there. What I however did was to post on my blog "Boycott
DistroWatch" (with application of Godwin's Law), and he couldn't
stand that, it seems. I guess this is called 'rancor' (FR rancune).

Of course, discussing on mailing lists is still possible...
 
> What's really nice is when some fixing goes along with that
> spotting.
Fixing of what?

Regards,
R-C



      __________________________________________________________________
Get the name you've always wanted @ymail.com or @rocketmail.com! Go to
http://ca.promos.yahoo.com/jacko/