On 02/03/2021 19:20, Mark Dadgar wrote:
As someone who is stuck using the ancient version of mailman3 in debian, I have to disagree. 99.9999% of the time I hit an issue, it turns out it was fixed years ago, but because I use the debian maintained version, I don't have those fixes. It's horrible.
So, why does someone not care about the debian package to fix that bugs? It is possible, and is done by other packages every day.
+100
I originally installed mailman3 via the ubuntu packages and I eventually replaced that setup (read: paid Brian to re-install mailman3 “correctly") for 2 key reasons:
- The ubuntu (and presumably debian) packages are 1+ years out of date - Quanah is correct in that most of the bugs you hit have been fixed already but haven’t made it through the package maintainer process yet.
Just being 1+ years old does not tell you a software is bad or not useable. Thats a nonce. Bugs shoudl be iron out with package fixes, if someone cares about. New versions are out, needs to be tested.
- The package installs are non-standard with respect to the way the mailman3 community tends to install them, which makes getting support here on this list much, much harder. You can see evidence of that periodically when someone asks a question and Mark’s response starts with “I’m not entirely sure how the <distro> package sets things up, but …”, which is no slight on Mark because he has his hands full with mm3 already and tracking every distro install layout is just not going to happen. It also means that the official mm3 docs don’t match what came out of your package. It’s just not good all the way around.
Sure, every software has its own scheme, but sthats what standards are for. I still cannot switch easy between fedora, debian and other distros due to different standards on file path. It is a nightmare. Thats why I like to stay with 1 standard for all softeare packages on one system. I do not want to run 20 software distributions with 20 ways of doing it the right waay (tm). You are right, the dev of a software should mostly care about fixing bugs, implementing new features and getting along with the software. Implementing different ways of installing is just a side topic. But someone should care about howto get the (useful) software to the masses for using it. And that position should care about howto implement the software good into the running distributions worldwide. And for distributions with a very good way of using packages, it is a nightmare to work beside the package manager just because the package is rather not well maintained.
Distribution packages tend to be useful for really basic things like libraries. For constantly evolving projects where you need to be current, they're more of a detriment.
So much this.
You do not need a bleeding edge software on production servers. You just need bug free, whihc is easy done with packages on distributions, if maintainers do it well enough.
For a testing server bleeing edge maybe fine, but not in production.
- Mark
mark@pdc-racing.net | 408-348-2878
Mailman-users mailing list -- mailman-users@mailman3.org To unsubscribe send an email to mailman-users-leave@mailman3.org https://lists.mailman3.org/mailman3/lists/mailman-users.mailman3.org/
MfG, Lars Schimmer
TU Graz, Institut für ComputerGraphik & WissensVisualisierung Tel: +43 316 873-5405 E-Mail: l.schimmer@cgv.tugraz.at Fax: +43 316 873-5402 PGP-Key-ID: 0x4A9B1723