[ic] Bugs ?

[Jason Kohles]

On Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 08:59:06AM +0700, utomo wrote:
> 
> >And nearly all of those bugs are in the development version, which is to be
> >expected from software that isn't finished yet.  I don't think anyone wants
> >us to get the bug list down to 0, since the only way to do that would be to
> >stop adding new features to Interchange and just give you version 4.6 for
> >the rest of your life.
> 
> I understand now. Better to separate it from bugs of last stable version,
> and bugs which belong to development version. If not this will make people
> confuse.
> 
Separating them will also confuse people who may not know what version they
are reporting errors for and put it into the wrong area, as it is now if you
look at a bug report it tells you which version is affected.  Also, if you
separate them you may end up with a lot of duplication, if someone posts a
bug in the version 4.7 area, it may be that the bug is also in 4.6.

> This is one of the big different, between Microsoft and other company. Other
> company make decission just by what they think (not what user think), by
> proud or what they think at current time, but Microsoft is doing by what
> customer/user think, and business strategy for long run.

I would say that Microsoft is doing what they think will maintain their
monopoly, not what their customers want.

> I think many people still remember when Microsoft Include the Java VM in the
> IE ( they will not include it anymore in IE 6/Win XP), and when they new
> with Win 3.11 (still using DOS), and now they try to minimizing/eliminating
> DOS, when they new with Internet they follow other people standard, but when
> they dominating the browser they try to make a rules/standard. and many
> other things. (But this is not same with I suggest you to do a same strategy
> as Microsoft).

Microsoft is leaving Java out of IE for one simple reason, when they attempted
to make their own version of Java that did not work with other versions, Sun
sued them.  Microsoft has a long history of taking existing standards and
trying to extend them so they only work with windows.

> - This is little bit different, Red Hat Interchange is Red Hat products, why
> you releasing version for Suse, Mandrake, etc ?
> my 2 cents please consider again this.
> 
Suse and Mandrake both use (I believe) the rpm format, which means the rpms
made for Red Hat Linux work just fine on Suse and Mandrake, some other packages
(such as the Debian packages) are made by Interchange users, not by Red Hat,
if you want to make a windows package, you are welcome to do so, thats the
nature of free software.

> 
> >> - Also if possible please just provide one package for all, not like now
> we
> >> have RPM for Red Hat Linux 7; an RPM for Red Hat Linux 6 and Linux
> Mandrake;
> >> and Debian GNU/Linux packages.
> 
> >Hate to disappoint you, but this is fundamentally impossible.  If you are
> using
> >Red Hat Linux, you need RPMs, if you are using Debian you need Debian
> packages,
> >the alternative to doing it this way is to distribute only the .tar.gz file
> and
> >make everyone compile and install it themselves, if you would prefer that,
> the
> >.tar.gz is available for you.
> 
> This is also one of the problem of the Linux Vs Microsoft.
> All Linux companies/guys did not working together with good strategy to
> Improve Linux, but they work in their own strategy.
> If people must have many version for each software, this will become a
> problem (even only small problem).
> After so long time, just not so ling time ago Linux realize this.
> - Now the important things for Linux: Driver , Development tools, and
> Training. Installation and GUI is almost OK.
> 
I don't think this is a problem, I see this as one of Linux's strengths, if you
don't like the way it works you have the option to make your own version.  I
agree that cooperation is important, but if you are running Windows and you
don't like the way it works, you have no choice, you can't download the source
code and change it.

> 
> > If you review the mailing list you will also see that there is a lot of
> work
> > going into improving the documentation, in fact we have a full time
> technical
> > writer doing nothing but documentation.  Docs don't appear overnight, they
> > take work.
> 
> Thanks. and Please add more Q&A/FAQ. any estimation schedule ?
> 
I know there is a lot of work going into the documentation, but I don't know
what their timetable is.

> > Interchange supports several payment providers, and 4.8 will support even
> > more since the payment processing has been completely rewritten.  The cost
> > of the provider is between you and your processor, we don't have anything
> > to do with what they charge you.
> 
> Thanks
> I talking the cost Red Hat asking/charge to that company (processor), if you
> asking too high: not so much company will interest. I think we must do a Win
> Win solution, if the provider is new/not popular you can charge more, but if
> the provider is popular, maybe you can negotiate the cost, because they will
> add your selling point.
> 
Red Hat doesn't charge the processors anything, you can't get much cheaper
than free.  Support for new processors generally gets added one of two
ways, either someone hires Red Hat to build an Interchange solution that
requires support for a new processor, and so in the process of building
their store we add support for that processor, or someone in the Interchange
community builds support for a processor and sends it in to be included in
Red Hat.

-- 
Red Hat E-Business Solutions                    Jason Kohles
11480 Sunset Hills Road                         Senior System Architect
Reston, VA 20190                                jkohles@redhat.com