Talk:MEPIS/Archive 1

message: I think the two links in question (i.e. a fan site and another Wiki) are both appropriate for the article here. Mind you, the link to screenshots seems a bit much. This isn't an advertising site. Fagstein 20:00, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I accept to keep the link to MEPISlovers. However, it's more a fan site and its wiki than a fan site and another Wiki, so I'm removing the link to the wiki.--Chealer 00:03, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:3o|Third opinion]]

message: This sounds like another debate that can be solved by citing sources. If these are really disadvantages, then we should have some objective source that cites this. That said, we should probably just note the differences and let the reader decide for themselves that these are disadvantages. Fagstein 20:03, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:3o|Third opinion]]

message: It's not true that Mepis doesn't use Debian repos. To represent the facts better you could say that Mepis packages are Debian with a very small exceptions. Another correct way to say it is that Mepis uses a mix of custom packages and Debian packages, it upgrades also from both Debian and Mepis sources. Planly saying "Mepis doesn't use Debian repos" is incorrect and misleading. I also think that we need to leave there the info about switching to Ubuntu repos which is important piece of information and relevant to the discussion. --  AdrianTM 19:27, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the info about switching to Ubuntu repos is relevant in the comparison with Debian section, since it only concerns MEPIS alpha, and I would guess that prospective MEPIS users would find MEPIS stable releases buggy enough. If you assert that MEPIS alpha is the choice of a large proportion of new MEPIS users, though, I will reevaluate this. In this case though, the modification you propose should explain why the change which is described as future is currently relevant.--Chealer 23:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's relevant info. There is need to mention that because that's a big change and it affects exactly the thing that we discuss: the stability and how up-to-date packages are. I think Wikipedia should inform people, not keep the information from them only because the official release will be available in 1-2 months. It's also clearly stated that it refers to the next release not the current one, readers will not get confused. I think that when you compare two things you can say something like: "and starting from the next month, X will be [...] than Z" I think that's legitimate especially when the change is important. It's also not a speculation about the future, it's a fact -- the proof is the fact that MEPIS developement is based on Ubuntu and there's a plan to release MEPIS based on Ubuntu in June ("SimplyMEPIS 6.0 is scheduled for final release around June 1, 2006"  AdrianTM 01:21, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Packages origin 

message: it's misleading to say that Mepis repos is more instable that Debian, since Mepis upgrades by default from Etch (for now, Mepis Alpha is based on Ubuntu Dapper already). That's like saying that Etch is less stable that Sarge without mentioning that Etch is more up-to-date = that's misleading, if you present a point present all the aspects not only the downsides. -- AdrianTM 00:46, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are wrong. Saying that Etch is less stable than Sarge at this moment is true, and not misleading. This article was more incomplete before I reviewed it. I do not use or intend to use MEPIS and it is not my intention to make it a perfect article, only to improve it. Feel free to add more, but please avoid removing relevant information.--Chealer 01:00, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "I do not use or intend to use MEPIS". I've been using Mepis for 2 years and Debian for a little bit more than that, I think I'm very well informed about the subject while you made same false and/or misleading changes. Your opinion that MEPIS is not as good as Debian is your right, however when you edit Wikipedia please stick to facts not opinions or assumptions. For example the assumptions that MEPIS packages might have more bugs than Debian -- what is based on? (especially that you don't even use MEPIS). -- AdrianTM 19:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have already made a point that the article just after the review could have been more clear about the stability differences, and I fixed that. I don't think the article says anymore that MEPIS packages might have more bugs than Debian in general. It says that stable MEPIS isn't Debian stable-stable. This fact is based on the fact that MEPIS doesn't use the same release cycle as Debian, as mentioned in the article. If you want me to justify that testing has more serious bugs than stable, that will be no problem.--Chealer 19:49, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's fine with me if you say MEPIS is based on Etch therefore it has Etch stability which is poorer than Stable (of course) I will also add that Etch packages are more up-to-date than Stable and that Mepis will be based on Ubuntu (already has released a Alpha based on Ubuntu) which will make it both stable and more up-to-date than Stable. I added that but you rolled back -- you should allow other opinions than yours on Wikipedia, it's perfectly fine to add what you consider that's a relevant fact, it's not OK to remove what other consider relevant -- that would make the story biased (my NPOV point) -- AdrianTM 20:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stability comparison 

message: I've removed a claim that MEPIS had better hardware support than Debian, and this was rollbacked. I'm rollbacking this again, until someone explains how the fact that Debian does not ship proprietary drivers in main would compensate the lack of support of alpha, arm, hppa, ia64, m68k, MIPS, powerpc, s390 and sparc from MEPIS.--Chealer 20:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: MEPIS does have better hardware on x86 architecture. That's a fact. Debian supports more architectures. That's a fact. You confuse two different issues. I explained very clear both issues without any risk of confusion, there's no need for any removal -- AdrianTM 20:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is. The article as it is currently claims that "MEPIS has better hardware support [...] tha[n] Debian", which is false and unacceptably misleading.--Chealer 20:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fixed: made it clear that it refers to x86 architecture. -- AdrianTM 20:40, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "MEPIS has better hardware support [...] tha[n] Debian"