Le mer 30/07/2003 à 17:12, Stephen Smoogen a écrit : > On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 19:07, Eric Hagberg morganstanley com wrote: > > As a customer paying for AS, I'd like it to reflect what we had in 2.1 - > > and everything install was possible, and that did mean everything. > > > > For those who want less, then they can use the default installtion. > > > > I don't really think this is a question of a supportable configuration, > > but more of an issue of packaging for marketing purposes, and that's > > what's got me peeved. > > > > When I worked at Red Hat, this was usually not a marketing call but a > development call on WHAT COULD BE SUPPORTED at WHAT LEVEL. Things could > have changed.. but development was pretty strong on 'If you want us to > guarentee 24/7 support at XYZ level, the number of packages have to be > small.' I understand. But those packages are already there (WS) and supported. Also, we are talking about adding free software in a, at least, 1500 $ product. -- Féliciano Matias <feliciano matias free fr>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message=?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=