Re: custom vs. derivative (Re: packages.gz corrupt, missing packages and other issues)
On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, Holger Levsen wrote:
There you explain that this lists purpose is defined on
http://lists.debian.org/debian-custom/ which states: "Developing common
infrastructure for custom Debian distributions
People on this list work on the challenges common to all custom Debian
distributions, ensuring that the tools and procedures developed are shared,
making the most efficient use of our energies."
So, this list is not about "Custom Debian Distributions" as defined in
http://wiki.debian.org/CustomDebian or in your paper - this list is about
custom Debian distributions. A small, but IMO important difference. (Which
contributes to all this confusion and is probably wrong. (Or not.))
Ahhhh, yes. Thanks for removing the blinkers I was obviousely wearing.
The description of the list should either be increased drastically or
we might even ask for a new list (in case we agree to a new name). But
I think if the description is clear things could live perfectly together.
(Rationale: a custom Debian distribution is any distribution somehow custom
made out of Debian (and maybe other ingredients as well). A Custom Debian
Distribution follows the definitions of this term.)
... which makes clear that the shift key is an important feature. ;-))
Thanks for opening my eyes.
That, and probably it should also be moved to a more "authoritive" place (=not
under people.d.o), IMO by now CDDs are an established part of Debian and not
a study object of yours (only) anymore :)
While I agree with you that this should be on a more prominent place I
know other examples (for instance the Library Packaging Guide) that should
not be under people.d.o - but they just are there. I guess the reason
for this is that I just have to issue just a "make publish" to get a
new version in effect while you know the burden of wml / cvs / wait for
corn job is just disgusting.
I agree, wikis need to be taken care off. But this is just the same as with
your paper in svn :-)
Absolutely. But I have better editing tools on my local computer than
in a Wiki. I just doubt that Wikis tend to be better maintainable. They
are in the first two to four weeks when people are continuosely working
on it. Once it comes to day to day work and you have no _real_ team
around it (good example: the WikiPedia "team") they bit rot as any other
form of web page.
But in difference to something in svn, contributing to
a wiki is usually much easier.
It is easier for others, this is right. But where are these mysterious
others? My personal estimation is that 75% of Wiki pages basically one
men shows from a certain point in time on. If there is a real team behind
I wiki it is great and might work. Feel free to blame me to have failed
to build a team ...
Developing Debian. If some people understand CDD differently and use our
tools, to build ubuntu^wsomething different without contributing back, let
them.
Ahhhh, sure!!!!
When did you got a different opinion???
I hope you will not find a single quote from me where I tried to prevent
anybody from using the tools or this mailing list for things that do not
belong to CDD issues according to our definition. The CDD tools are Free
Software and can be used for any purpose. I actually know cases when
people reported bugs or success when they used the stuff for internal
use in their company / institute. I'm rather quite happy about such things.
As I said, I try to be tolerant if people use this list for things I
would regard inapropriate. I'm keen on seeing how things develop - perhaps
we are on the wrong track with the CDD approach (I have no actual sign
for this - but having a look does not harm.
In fact I just can not comment on things when I'm not competent and sometimes
I ask for clarification if I do not understand the question because of
different usage of terms. This was the case in the initial mail. So I
tried to put the terms in right shape and ... moved on.
It might "hurt" them and/or us in the long run (because energy is not invested
as good as it would be possible), but you cannot force contributions.
Why do you think I would try to force anybody???
I try to force clear expressions because otherwise communication will
just fail - but I never intended to force anybody to do / leave
anything.
No. I would like to use a term that is clear enough to be understood
correctly without reading any definition.
I think this sentence is the main reason why I pressed "reply" to this mail. I
cannot agree more than to this. (!!!)
Fine. ;-)
I think that term, Debian internal subdistribution, is too much ("sperrig"
would be the german word). Debian Internal Distribution would be better, IMO,
but still doesnt sound nice (to me).
I would not call it "sperrig" - but we'll talk about it ...
Actually, I dont think there is anything wrong if people use CDD tools (be it
cdd-dev, simple-cdd or whatever) to build their distro (within Debian or
without) and discuss this here. As long as not the whole distro is discussed
and developed here :-)
Sure. But I hope nobody will try to force me to spend my time into learning
tools I do not know currently to be able to answer any question on this list
- that's all.
Kind regards
Andreas.
Reply to: