On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 11:24:12 +0200 Free Ekanayaka wrote: > If you we limit our scope to full-Debian CDDs, which contain only > official Debian packages and are released when Debian is released, > probably PDK is overkill, ...which _is_ the scope of CDDs. CDD is an ambiguitive abbreviation, but the project behind the term has explicitly declared a goal of "all within Debian". So interpreting CDD as "Custom [repackaging or extensions of the] Debian Distribution" is wrong. The correct interpretation is "Custom [subset of the] Debian Distribution". Please note, that I welcome repackaging and extending Debian. Just please do not confuse things by misusing a term already defined for something else: It is then a _derived_ distribution, not a CDD. Your main point still stands: PDK might be relevant as a tool both for CDDs and for derived distributions. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ - Enden er n_r: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm
Attachment:
pgpL9lBaTWy49.pgp
Description: PGP signature