On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 08:25 -0400, Ivan Krstic wrote:
> Ãtienne Bersac wrote:
> > That would be more professional.
> As has been made abundantly clear by now, whether a different approach
> to the development version artwork would be "more professional" doesn't
> at all matter. No one is aiming for professionalism (or even humor) yet;
> Dapper is a development release. As such, it might decide to set your
> files on fire, wipe your partition table, eat all your Easter chocolate,
> or otherwise inflict serious evil on your system. And it happens to have
> wonky artwork in preparation for the real one to land. If any of the
> above bother you, don't run the development version -- Breezy is a great
> system. If you do choose to run the development version anyway, you lose
> the right to complain about things being, you know, in development.
Although I broadly agree with what you say about the artwork, this is a
very dangerous attitude to take if we are interested in getting people
to test the development version. Everyone using it knows there is some
element of risk in using it, but if we are going to be _this_ extreme
about discouraging people from using it, then we are not going to get
many testers, and the OS will suck more.
The testing community is a fundamental part of the growth and quality
assurance of the project, and some attention has to be paid to not
alienating that community.
I for one will certainly not use Dapper if there is any chance of it
eating my Easter chocolate.
gnupg pub 1024D/0E6B06FF
ubuntu-devel mailing list