| 1 |
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 15:37 +0100, Andrea Barisani wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 02:47:45PM +0000, Kurt Lieber wrote: |
| 3 |
> > We have received *numerous* complaints from users about the decision to |
| 4 |
> > remove stage 1 and 2 from the installation documentation. I realize it's |
| 5 |
> > still available if users are willing to dig for it, but not all users do. |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > In my years of monitoring www@g.o, we've received the most |
| 8 |
> > complaints about this decision than any other single decision. Is there a |
| 9 |
> > way we can re-introduce the stages into the installation documentation, |
| 10 |
> > perhaps with gigantic warnings saying, "for advanced users only" or "use at |
| 11 |
> > your own risk"? |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > --kurt |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I perfectly agree with this request, we should provide the choice and clear |
| 17 |
> point that out (along with all the correlated risks) instead of simply |
| 18 |
> "hiding" the option. And I sincerely hope there's no intention to remove |
| 19 |
> stage1/stage2 tarballs in the future because that would be a really a bad thing |
| 20 |
> imho. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
The problem with listing risks and such is the users aren't listening. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
They are ignoring our warnings and breaking their own systems, then |
| 25 |
filing bugs. The problem is that these are *not* bugs, but issues with |
| 26 |
incompatibility. It is impossible to install something that requires a |
| 27 |
configured kernel before you have a configured kernel. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Now, on the topic of the tarballs. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Give me one example of something that you can do with a stage1 or stage2 |
| 32 |
tarball that you cannot with a stage3 tarball. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 36 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
| 37 |
x86 Architecture Team |
| 38 |
Games - Developer |
| 39 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives