challenge: end of life for 6.2 is premature with buggy 6.3

[Jo Rhett]

On Jun 5, 2008, at 2:45 AM, Steven Hartland wrote:
> You are still fail to take to the time to even tell people what these
> bugs are, no ones a mind reader!
>
> People are trying to help you here but all I'm hearing is a child like
> "It doesn't work fix it", with no willingness to even explain what it
> is or provide resources to test if someone found the time to  
> investigate
> your issues.
> Given this I don't see how you can expect these so called issues to
> ever get fixed.

I think you are misunderstanding the point at hand.  I'm not trying to  
address specific issues.  (I'd be happy to in another thread next  
week).  This thread was created to address the overall well-documented  
list of bugs in 6.3, which is the *only* supported stable version of  
the operating system.  (7.0 is even less stable)

The most stable (by numbers of bugs and numbers of reported problems)  
is 6.2.

I see no valid reasoning that can be backed up by numbers as to why  
6.2 should be EoL.  That's the point I'm addressing.  The specific  
bugs that affect us are not necessarily relevant to the overall  
stability.  And anyone can do the same searches on the bug list to  
confirm these numbers for themselves.

-- 
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source  
and other randomness