[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

I demand that Anthony Towns may or may not have written...

> Darren Salt wrote:
>> I demand that Anthony Towns may or may not have written...
>>> Put them behind a firewall on a trusted LAN, use them to develop software
>>> for arm chips, and then just follow unstable or run
>>> non-security-supported snapshots. Apart from writing software for
>>> embedded arm things, I can't see the value
>> "Linux desktop box" comes to mind...

> But why would you spend over 1000 pounds on an arm Linux desktop box
> instead of a few hundred pounds on a random i386 desktop box?

Compatibility with what I already have and use? The older hardware won't last
forever (and this Risc PC, for example, is 10 years old)...

> A reasonable answer is because you're developing for arm's for embedded
> applications; but if so, what's the big deal with using unstable or
> snapshots, and running your public servers on other boxes?

What's wrong with people just using them as desktop boxes, using both OSes?

>>> -- and if an arch is just going to be used for development, does it
>>> really need all the support we give stable in order to make it useful for
>>> servers and such?
>> Probably not, but ISTM that you'll first have to ascertain that it *is*
>> only being used for development before you can say that that support
>> definitely isn't needed.

> Uh, you've got that round the wrong way: you don't do something because you
> can't say support definitely isn't needed, you do something because you
> *can* say support definitely *is* needed.

That may well be, but ISTM that you implied that the arch isn't going to be
used for non-development tasks...

>>> If so, why? If not, what level of support does it need, that goes beyond
>>> "unstable + snapshotting facility", and why? Debian developers [...]
>> You're focusing too much on development here. There are users too, you
>> know... :-)

> Haven't seen any evidence of it -- developers and vendors, yes, users, or
> uses, no...

I can't answer all of that myself, but there are people who can.

(Adding debian-arm. Note followups to both lists.)

[1] Not at the same time, of course. ;-)

| Darren Salt   | linux (or ds) at | nr. Ashington,
| woody, sarge, | youmustbejoking  | Northumberland
| RISC OS       | demon co uk      | Toon Army
|   <URL:http://www.youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk/> (PGP 2.6, GPG keys)

This portion of UTS II is a trade secret of Amdahl Corporation.

Reply to: