Re: Debian: abandon ship?
>>"Nick" == Nick Jacobs <nj1072000@yahoo.com> writes:
Nick> A few days ago, David Wright posted a message to this list,
Nick> questioning the wisdom of Debian's decision to target 11
Nick> architectures. He pointed out (with supporting references) that
Nick> this decision has contributed to a long delay in releasing
Nick> Woody; of course, other people have said this before.
Well, this is only partially true. All architectuures for
Woody are ready. They are not delaying the release. What is not ready
is the ability to support security for woody and potato for even the
architectures that we have now -- not with the increased number of
packlages that the security team has to support.
So, woody can't be released even now, wqith the arches that
potato supports.
Nick> The main result was that a small number of Debian insiders
Nick> posted abusive comments in response to David's perfectly
Nick> reasonable message. (The thread, in case you missed it, has the
Nick> subject "This post is not off-topic".)
This is a foul canar. His reasonable questions received a
reasonable resaponse: Debian has no release schedules, and that the
goals of the project are not to maximize popularity.
When you start making demands of the developers, the standard
response was again given; that the developers have no obligation to
meet demands on how they must spend their time volunteering. Abuse? I
would characterize demands as abuseive, myself.
Nick> With hindsight, it's clear that trying to support too many
Nick> architectures was a mistake. Of course, everybody makes
Nick> mistakes. It is truly said that he who never made a mistake,
Nick> never made anything.
I beg to differ. The arches are ready. The developers who work
on these architectures as a labour of love can't just be
reassigned. Porting packages uncovers flaws that makes packages less
buggy on all architectures.
Of course, when it comes down to the brass tacks, if such a
difference of opinion exists, the people who do the work get to
decide which side is right.
Nick> But what separates the doers from the wannabes is the ability
Nick> to admit a mistake, change direction, and move on.
I see. A bunch of people that have put together a distribution
of Linux, one that is fairly succesful, are the wannabees, and
bystanders critisizing the effor t are the doers. I would think that
actually getting out there and putting together one of the top 5
distributions would classify debian as one of the doers, but hey,
what do I know.
Nick> If the people in effective control of Debian's direction no
Nick> longer have this ability, then perhaps Debian is no longer
Nick> useful to most of us.
We are a pretty egalitarian bunch. If there was a wide spread
dissonance with this decision, it would not have happened. And whther
Debian is useful or not is a decision every one has to make on their
own.
It is still useful for me.
manoj
--
One does not thank logic. Sarek, "Journey to Babel", stardate 3842.4
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: