Hi, (dropped ftpmasters@ because that address doesnt exist anyway and we read the list :-) On Mittwoch, 8. April 2009, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > I am sorry you fail to see the usefulness of this approach. It is > useful because it provide a _working solution_ to the problem. I see the usefulness of the result, I just dont share the view on the severity of the problem. I agree having a DVD install which works without network is usefull, but I think the vast majority of schools will have network, so we could also implement it differently. (Which would be very close to what we already have.) > I am also sorry you see it this way. I believe the policy has value > even if it has to be "handwaved" when we need to solve short term > issues. Besides, you seem to believe that the archive policy as > written block us from including packages that have problems. It does > not state this, it states "normally we accept only packages which are > also part of Debian", and I claim that this case is exceptional, as in > not normal. To me our policy shall help us to become 100% Debian one day. If we rely on packages which have no chance to get into Debian _and_ don't push a solution in Debian forward (no bug filed, etc.) we will never reach that goal. > I believe I will leave this for others to evaluate and follow up, and > focus on other issues for now. I have made a solution to this release > critical issue available, and as far as I can see it is the best > option we have among the bad ones we have available. As I wrote in my > initial email, I believe it is a worse solution to just copy the > tarballs into the DVD, for variuos reasons. If anyone find a new > option in addition to the two I have sketched that is better than this > proposal, I am all for it, but until anyone do that, I suggest we go > ahead with this exceptional solution for Lenny. I'm willing to work (help welcome!) on getting tarballs on the DVD during the build process (the solution you say is inferior) and make them used during installation. If the need to update those tarballs arise, there aree to choices: update them from new DVDs or download the tarballs themselves, both need+shall to be documented. No big deal IMHO (or at least less deal than depending on binary only .deb packages.) I continue to find .debs which dont build from their .dscs unacceptable. regards, Holger
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.