Re: custom vs. derivative (Re: packages.gz corrupt, missing packages and other issues)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 12:48:53AM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Andreas, Jonas and me just had a nice real life discussion, which made me send
>this mail.... the topic was that one cannot change a written down definition.
>(Or at least I think this was the topic :)
>
>Basically I'm just resending the following two paragraphs, with one term
>exchanged...:
>
>
>And IMO, either something is a Debian Subdistribution or not. Thats quite
>binary in my opinion :-)
>
>OTOH, I also think something can be called a Debian Subdistribution, even if
>the aim, to be 100% part of Debian has not been achieved yet. As long as
>there is this aim and work on this aim is being done.
...which is exactly why I favor the term "pure blend" as a new name for
what is currently defined as CDD: you can "blend" (as in stir, shake,
sort) the priority of packages to favor postfix over Exim or XFCE over
Gnome, but pure can only mean 100% Debian.
Good night, and thanks for all the (jelly?)fish!
- Jonas
- --
IT-guide dr. Jones <dr@jones.dk> http://dr.jones.dk/ +45 40843136
Debian GNU/Linux <js@debian.org> http://www.debian.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFH9W8On7DbMsAkQLgRApGnAKCM75474zqRZM+raZva8eGpZ3el+gCfcLPS
HHNnF2bqqJHOmcxTYgfNL0c=
=dno3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: