[om-council] Council meeting April 21st follow-up [1]

rugyada rugyada at gmail.com
Mon Apr 25 06:35:49 EDT 2016


95% agree here.

Just, if you are interested and like, I *can reasonably suppose* that
QA and "NOGO" people could have with you a serene, friendly and
profitable opinions-exchange about the why(s) and the how(s) it went.
Of course, it's my own opinion because I surely cannot talk on behalf
of anyone :)
Nevertheless, it could be useful in order to make things clear.

Imho, we absolutely need a _shared_ plan, to make our things well working.


2016-04-25 11:57 GMT+02:00 Tomasz Gajc <tpgxyz at gmail.com>:
>
>
>> We're the first distribution to use clang as its main compiler. That would
>> be thrown away if we were to move to something else as a base.
>
>
> Hi,
>
> i'd say that we blowed up this chance, because of "undefinied quality level"
> bla, bla bla blockers, bla bla bla, lot of bugs, bla, bla bla. NO GO.
> Nobody out there even think about OMA being first distro using LLVM/clang,
> because of NO RELEASE and NOT existing marketing.
>
> Look at the many linux realted sites, blogs etc, news goes crazy everywhere
> about trivial things like "OMG ubuntu builds kernel 4.5.0, OMG they are some
> awesome". While we are doing more awesome work, without being sponsored by
> tons of money.
>
> I haven't seen any news out there that OMV is so awesome because it uses
> LLVM/clang with LTO that gives great performance. There were two main
> reasons:
> 1. Out of reach QA expectations
> 2. Release never happened
>
> Imho if we want to survive RORE (Release Often, Release Early) must be
> implemented a top of rolling release model only for architectures that have
> future.
>
>





-- 
____________________
Best regards,
Cristina



More information about the OM-Council mailing list