Re: Glut package changed, no documentation in 7.3

[Patrick Paul <patpaul MIT EDU>]

I agree with you.  Every 'i' and 't' can't be expected, and I always 
could file a bug report.  But wait!!  I already did.  
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65675
Following that, I replied offline saying that it should have been 
documented.  I received an email informing me that I was, more or less, 
curt.  And that I had been added to his procmail filter, so don't bother 
replying.  And that he didn't mind checking my 'bugs' as NOTABUG, and 
that he would be sure to look down on any future 'bugs' I might have. 
I'd post the email, but it pissed me off so much that I deleted it.

I have to admit, this is the first time I've felt of RedHat as a 
corporate entity.  

Rob Saul wrote:

> On Thursday 30 May 2002 09:53, Patrick Paul wrote:
>  
>
> > But, why wasn't this documented? 
> >    
>
> It should have been, but...
>
> my guess would be an oversight on somebody's part.  You
> could always submit a bug report to RedHat.  
>
>  
>
> > effectively wasted my time.  Sour experience definitely.  I wonder what
> > UnitedLinux is like....
> >    
>
> I have yet to come across a distribution that doesn't have it's warts.
> they're often a pain when you comes across one.  I know you're
> feeling of frustration.  goodness knows the amount of time I've spent
> trying to find where a particular file I'm looking for comes from.  
>
> But a Linux distribtion on the scale of RedHat is a big project.  Dotting
> every "i" and crossing every "t" takes time that sometimes disappears
> in a release schedule.  Or sometimes someone just forgets to fire up
> a text editor and add a line to the release notes.  They're human.
> QA'ing something to size of RH is quite an undertaking.
>
> 	~Rob
>
>  

--
Patrick Paul
Systems Administrator
Biology Dept., MIT 68-371
617-452-2951
patpaul mit edu