Re: Corel and Debian Development was:( Lothar Project)
Speaking for myself, I think Debian *development* of large, general
systems such as hardware detection, disk geometry, etc., etc., should
only be undertaken with the greatest reluctance.
That is to say that the issues of hardware detection, et al, are very
general issues. Moreover, the Debian project ought to retain it's
focus as *integrators* -- people who make all that software get
together and dance.
In fact, I was very pleased to see Bruce Perens say he wants to revive
'busybox' development (that provides the basis for our rescue
mini-distribution).
I think there are many Debian developers who love to take part in a
general hardware detection system. And they should. But Debian
itself should always be looking to *upstream* as much as we can.
Other boot floppies stuff which should be upstreamed:
* libfdisk (doesn't libsfdisk handle this)
* all the lilo configuration issues (and, by extension, other boot managers)
Again, this is just my opinion.
Dave, to answer your question, I can understand your conundrum.
Remember, Debian is a volunteer organization. Our "space" is the
space of free software, but we partipate and contribute to free
software like any collection of individuals. As I said, I'm
uncomfortable personally with Debian taking on responsiblity for a
large, complex software project which isn't inherently
Debian-specific. But that's not to say that we wouldn't be interested
in being contributors, or even the primary users.
--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
Reply to: