Re: Presentation + A debian-based for audio creation and production, stage technics and video blend (or "the future of TangoStudio")
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 09:30:20AM +0100, Aurélien Roux wrote:
> >Just ensure that the blend metapackage(s) don't depend on it.
>
> Maybe it might even have a conflict with pulseaudio, no?
We discussed the option of having conflicts in metapackages several
times. If I remember correctly the main drawback is that users who
really really want to have pulseaudio need to deinstall the metapackage
which is not always what you want.
I personally confirm that I regard the *option* to add conflicts a
reasonable thing to do - if used sparsely with the drawback above in
mind it could be helpful. The only reason why it is not yet implemented
is that we did not yet had any practical need for this. If you really
want to have the conflicts option it is no big deel to implement it
inside blends-dev.
> Thanks. I've already read all of this, and I've to precise I often
> build my own packages of Debian software, so that my "distribution"
> are easier to maintain.
> adi helped me much in that way, btw.
Sounds like you would have some repository of things that could be
moved straight into Debian. You should contact the Debian Multimedia
team whether they might like to sponsor your work.
> >Debian has an installer that has both console and graphical interfaces
> >(both are front-ends to the same thing). Integrating Debian Pure
> >Blends into the Debian Installer is something that should have
> >happened a long time ago but it doesn't seem like anyone has bothered
> >to work on that yet.
>
> Is it linked to that problem about tasksel and having the whole
> package available on the first disc?
There are several reasons. The reason you are mentioning above should
be gone with Wheezy at least. IMHO the main problem here is as always:
So far nobody has done the work and specifically nobody has done some
kind of general Blends solution. Historically the developing the code
that is used by Blends was some kind of cherry picking from different
teams to make them available for all those teams that are focussing to
certain user groups. For the moment no such cherry for creating a
reasonable installer was picked (it might be that Debian Edu has a good
candidate).
> >Different WMs are going to be useful in different situations and
> >everyone has their own preference, best leave that choice to the
> >person installing the system.
>
> I agree and don't agree. Let me explain.
> On one hand, many people do not understand that separation between
> an OS and its graphical representation. That's why many people, in
> the focus of audio-production, live-shows, and others, are just
> scared when speaking about Debian, because they think they're going
> to lose their Ubuntu Studio's Gnome, or whatever.
> I could make an again worse example when speaking about Mac / MS
> users (as a reminder, I work as a teacher about the use of GNU/Linux
> for sound/lights technicians).
> One thing really cool on TangoStudio (the thing that made me chose
> this solution upon others for my students) is that it has, by
> default, a Gnome version really user-friendly, and still really
> light-wieghted, something close to XFCE / LXDE in terms of ressource
> eating.
I fully understand your reasoning. The weak part is here "*my*
students". Just assume that some other tutor has a diverging preference
and is able to convince *his* students that his preference is the "best"
ever solution. In other words: I do not question your decision but
finally it is some exclusive choice very frequently based on personal
taste and thus hard to define objective facts what is "the best".
> So, I think this might be a good thing that this blend come with WM,
> at least for non-expert users (I've seen it's not managed really by
> now, as it's users groups that are used).
> Typically I would see it that way: during the installation you might
> chose between:
>
> - no WM (expert user)
> - let me chose and manage my WM my way
> - LXDE / XFCE (light-weighted WM - recommended)
> - Openbox (highly configurable WM - expert user)
> - Gnome 3 (touchscreen oriented WM)
I think at this stage it will not make any sense to discuss those
details here. Finally you will be facing the situation that you need
to choose on your very own. Paul and me just wanted to make sure that
you should try to widen your focus from your personal environment to
more general cases.
Moreover you should consider: Debian is a Do-O-cracy. So if *you* are
doing the work on this you are free to push *your* decisions as long as
nobody else comes along and will question your work. I guess if you
finally will write an installer like you proposed above and you will not
get any bug report "Please enable KDE" (just for example) everything is
fine. You could even test how honest the bug reporter is about this and
can ask for a patch. I do not say that you should create artifical
hurdles for such requests - but sometimes you have more thrilling things
to do than implementing a wishlist feature and it can be a prove of the
seriousness of the reporter if he is willing to provide a patch.
> I fully agree with the fact that WM has not much to deal with audio
> production, live shows, and so on. But, it's a fact (imo ;) ), WM,
> and actually the look and feel of a blend/distribution weights a lot
> in an end-user choice, especially in that audioproduction world in
> which Apple is strongly installed and users are used to touchy
> interfaces!
No doubt about this.
> >There are zero specialised Debian Pure Blends creating iso images
> >(live or installer) that are distributed on the official Debian
> >infrastructure, the only blends doing that are the generic
> >GNOME/KDE/Xfce/LXDE desktop blends and the standard/rescue images.
>
> Really? I thought there was some (like SkoleLinux / DebianEDU), as
> it's descibed in the docs:
Yes.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: