🚀 go-pugleaf

>I have news for you:  Lots of rather expensive software is
>sort of beta-test or in some cases sort of alpha-test.

My experience is that most commercial software is quite poor.
The installation procedures rarely work properly, the
instructions alternate between puerile simplicity and
utter obscurity, bugs abound, though the support service
must be coerced to admit their existence, and they may
be fixed next year if you are lucky.

It is true that GNU software rarely compiles and installs
without my needing to change *something*, but it usually doesn't
take long to find what, and help is widely available if I can't
find by myself what needs to be done.

In fact, by implementing GNU software in new environments and
then reporting what changes were necessary, all of us are
contributing to the improvement of the software.  If the new
releases of gcc or emacs or bash or g++ or any gnu utility
are taking longer than ever to appear, surely this is because
of the vast amount of feedback that the maintainers are
struggling to take into account -- and they do this far more
conscientiously than any commercial software supplier I have
tried to deal with.

The eventual appearance of the GNU kernel this year will surely
turn the whole world of proprietary software on its head.  I'm
as anxious as anyone to see this happen (and to help it along),
but I don't want the opportunity spoiled by releasing prematurely
something which fails to live up to the quality of other GNU
software.

				Yours,
				A. V. Le Blanc
				ZLSIIAL@UK.AC.MCC.CMS