Re: CDD-package inside of Debian or out?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 21-05-2005 18:20, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Fri, 20 May 2005, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
>> When a CDD includes only postfix and not 5-10 alternative MTAs, then it
>> is removing the choice of MTA When a CDD includes KDE and not other
>> desktop frameworks then it is also removing choice.
>
> If you ask me (personally!) I would love if someone would remove the
> choice of an apropriate MTA from my shoulders. I hate to have the
> choice
So would I. I think all of us CDD-lovers love the lack of specific
choices. That is exactly what I am talking about: CDDs _do_ take away
choices originally provided by Debian (and yes, that is good).
Hmm - why do we discuss something we seem to agree?
Well, I provokingly suggested CDD metapackages to be recognized as
"bastards of Debian" rather than "children of Debian".
> If you ask me a CDD should not really depend from a certain desktop
> environment but on certain applications which are needed by the end
> users.
What choices a CDD should or should not remove from the local admin is
IMHO not for us to define as developers of a _common_ framework for CDDs.
To express this in debtags-speak, you describe CDDs as tied to the use::
facet, and extending to combinations of use:: facets. I want CDDs to
make sense with whatever facet(s) having a community large/eager enough
to develop and maintain the CDD :-)
> In the case of Debian-Edu the lot of education related
> software (KdeEdu) is a valid reason to prefer KDE but according to
> my knowledge the other CDDs do not have a certain preference of a
> desktop environment and I hope that this can be fixed in the future
> by better support of KDE applications under Gnome and others.
In a distant future opening a GNOME app from within a KDE session is not
confusing to the end-user and does not consume excessive amounts of
memory for parallel libraries basically doing same kinds of things.
But let's build a framework for the world (of groups interested in
making CDDs) of today, and try make our framework flexible enough to
adapt when tomorrow comes.
Today Skolelinux could use a CDD that generates what the Skolelinux CD
consists of today. Possibly Skolelinux wants to become something else
tomorrow when KDE and GNOME has become something else. I sure hope so :-)
> So I would call the desktop environment as a very low priority issue
> for CDDs.
The choice of MTA and the choice of desktop are just examples. Let's not
go into prioritizing my examples - the point is that they are both
valid, and each CDD picks themselves what choices they want to remove,
wether we provide them an easy tool to do it with or not.
Your vision of CDDs seems to be to support "production environments" -
school, medical, music, law. I just feel it wrong of us to constrain the
CDD framework to whatever we feel is sane: Someone might consider it
relevant to do a "gnome" CDD, with everything pure GNOME and explicitly
avoiding "pollution" from different suites. And similar with GNUstep or
KDE...
To express this in debtags-speak, you describe CDDs as tied to the use::
facet, and extending to combinations of use:: facets. I want CDDs to
make sense with whatever facet(s) having a community large/eager enough
to develop and maintain the CDD :-)
- Jonas
- --
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
- Enden er nær: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCkc5Rn7DbMsAkQLgRApoyAJ0ZX+fy+ZLHMwL/xKuu9QzoHUt7rACbBC0k
Ci/FJYaBBzCJ7PRbiybd4OY=
=rgOW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: