There has been an awful lot of discussions about ways to "Stablize
Linux" --- whether this is good or bad --- the need for an "Official
Release", and talk about a "Linux Committee".  I've seen some stuff I
agree with, and some stuff that I disagree with.  Not surprisingly, the
people with whom I agree with tended to be the people who were putting a
lot of hard work into Linux already --- and the people whom I disagreed
with were people whom, by and large, their names I did not recognize as
Linux developers.

You should all keep in mind that the people who have been putting in
their time to make Linux better do so out of a labor of love; Linux is
freeware, and it is relatively rare for freeware to be of the quality
that Linux already is.  I hear a lot of calls about ways people think
Linux should be made better; but what I don't hear is anyone
volunteering to actually do the work.  

This is why a Linux committee would not terribly productive; if it's
composed of people who do nothing more than demand that volunteers spend
even more of their time working on it, so that it becomes "acceptable"
--- it won't work, and it will only breed resentment on both sides.  If
it is composed of those who are actually doing the work --- well, those
who are already doing the work currently have the say about what their
work produces; why have a committee to formalize such things?

What we're seeing is the results of Linux's success.  It has proven to
be so successful that people are forgetting that it is freeware, and
STILL IN BETA TEST; that it is rare for you to even get what you pay
for, let alone exceed what you paid for it (which is what Linux has
clearly done).  Instead, people are assuming that it should be a
turn-key system; and Someone should put together better system
administration tools than what currently exists on the market.

Guys (and Gals) ---- release engineeering is hard work, and in general
no fun.  You should be thanking those people who have been putting
together the MCC release, the TAMU release, or the MJ release, not
complaining about how the maintainers should be putting even more of
their free time into it.  If you're not satisifed with the quality of
those releases, put one together yourself!  If it's better than all the
others, everyone will start using it.

As for system administration tools --- that is still an unsolved
problem; I have yet to see a general purpose system administrator's tool
that works in all environments; handles everything that a potential
sysadmin might want to do; and doesn't get in the way of an experienced
administrator.  Why are people demanding that Linux provide a solution
to an unsolved research problem?

In summary, if you're not satisfied with how Linux is progressing, put
in the time and effort to improve the areas you are complaining about.
If you can't do that, rest assured that many of us are aware of the
shortcomings of Linux, and some of us are wondering how to find the time
to address the deficiency.  Flaming about it, however, isn't going to
help.  Talk is cheap; actually doing something about it is harder.

                                        - Ted