Re[2]: RH Gnome Sucks ?

["Thomas R. Shannon" <tshanno orion it luc edu>]

On 20 Jul 2000 14:07:59 -0400 you wrote:

 > 
 > "Thomas R. Shannon" <tshanno@orion.it.luc.edu> writes: 
 > > I'm guessing that he meant a version which was distributed
 > > with Red Hat (i.e. an old one).
 > > 
 > 
 > Which was of course the newest and best stable version available at
 > the time (more stable in fact, since it had some integration and
 > bugfix work), so if that version sucked, then GNOME sucked.
 > 
 > RH 6.0 was the first version of GNOME that was sufficiently stable to
 > even think about using, due to extremely long hours worked by the
 > members of RHAD Labs (which didn't include me at the time).
 > 
 > Not to mention that all the other distributions at the time either
 > didn't ship GNOME, shipped a more-broken version of GNOME, or were Red
 > Hat based. Which makes you wonder why Red Hat is singled out.

Personally, I thought the version that sipped with 6.2 was just fine.
And I really had no problem with RH shipping the early version with
6.0.  Its just that its gotten much better since then.  In Miguel's
defense its probably worth encouraging people to upgrade.

I know your comments weren't directed at me but for what its worth,
I've been a relatively happy RH user since version 3.  I was a very
early user of the KDE betas but switched when I heard that RH was
supplying code to the GNOME project.  You don't need to defend their
actions or their distribution to me.  I have no problems with them.

Tom
--
Quote of the day for July 20th, 2000
The future you shall know when it has come; before then, forget it.
		- Aeschylus