Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 8:46 PM, Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com wrote:
Or if someone sets it up for him. He is not going to develop inhouse linux expertise just to be able to test this software.
True.
+1 and they should hence be paying for support for that software if they're looking at moving to a FOSS program because it is better. If they're looking at FOSS only as a cost cutting compromise then they're screwed anyway because they've misunderstood the first thing about FOSS -- it is Free as in Freedom (mukt) and not food (muft).
The 'mukti' is from the license and quota raj where the user has to shell out loads of money every year to upgrade his software so that he can continue using it to its desired potential. If it costs him a bigger amount to move to FOSS I doubt if he will go for it. Anyway that is different from testing of FOSS software which is the topic of discussion?
Secondly, the CA concerned is not going to bother to test the software and then put details of bugs he has found on the mailing list and sit on his hunches waiting for somone some time to respond. He would instead be interested only if he has a direct access to the developer where he can pick up the phone and say "hey buddy, this is what we did and it went like this which is not how the accounts should be." and to be able to explain what happened or should happen and perhaps get them to duplicate it at their end. If you want domain experts to do the software testing, then you cant (at least in this case) wait for a linux savy and linux expert CA to come and do it.
Yes. Many people are not 'file a bug report' savvy.
Yes, but there's a number of them who would be perfectly willing to pick up a phone and make a call to someone to complain/troubleshoot. Support helps here. Paid support helps quicker.
We are still testing the software on an experimental basis. What you are mentioning is support for full production ready software.