[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: custom vs. derivative (Re: packages.gz corrupt, missing packages and other issues)



Hi,

On Thursday 03 April 2008 12:56, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I think the precise statement that fits the definition is:
>     The Debian Edu team has developed the main part of the the
>     SkoleLinux distribution which is mostly based on the Debian Edu
>     CDD.  The product SkoleLinux contains some parts that are
>     not yet included in Debian Edu and thus are not part of
>     the CDD.

I'm sorry, but this is not precise, this is just wrong :-D

Debian Edu and Skolelinux are two names for the same thing.

Some people say that Debian Edu is the project name and Skolelinux is the 
distribution, but this is not really right, it's more to make a distinction 
where there really is none. This is done, because many people cannot cope 
with one thing having two names. 

But it is perfectly fine, to call the project and the distro "Skolelinux".
As it is perfectly fine, to call the project and the distro "Debian Edu".

This has historic reasons (in some places "Skolelinux" is a very much known 
name, in others its Debian Edu). 

Anyway. Whats more importantly wrong in the above sentence is the part about 
some parts ;-) Debian Edu (or Skolelinux..) consists 99,867% of Debian, the 
rest is taken from outside the Debian archive, the Debian Edu archive. But 
everything in Skolelinux is Debian Edu, as its the same thing.

And IMO, either something is a CDD or not. Thats quite binary in my 
opinion :-) 

OTOH, I also think something can be called a CDD, 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.


regards,
	Holger

Attachment: pgpxw_mmKkgvN.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: