Re: Non-free section

["Richard G. Roberto" <richr@Bear.COM>]

On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, Lars Wirzenius wrote:

> [ Please don't Cc: me when replying to my message on a mailing list. ]
> 
> Marek Michalkiewicz:
> > OK, but let's not be too dogmatic about it.  The question is - how we
> > define "clearly separated"?
> 
> As a separate distribution, parallel to stable, unstable, contrib,
> and non-US. Making it a section is not clearly separated.

So the "distributions are:

stable, unstable, contrib, non-US and non-free?

> 
> Dealing with stability in non-free is easily done by having two
> non-free directories:
> 
> 	non-free-rex (symlink non-free-stable points here)
> 	non-free-bo (symlink non-free-unstable points here)
> 
> Our top level directory is getting a bit big. We might want to
> re-organize the whole directory tree so that all parallel
> distributions that should work together are put into the same
> subdirectory:
> 
> 	bo/
> 		contrib/
> 		debian/
> 		non-free/
> 		non-US/
> 
> The stable and unstable symlinks at the top level would remain,
> and would point at rex/debian and bo/debian, respectively.
> 
> Note that we can't move the files at once. We would have to
> do it bit by bit, starting with the release after bo. Otherwise
> we'll kill mirror sites.

Why don't we just "freeze" the "bo related" distributions as they
are when the time comes and when bo's successor is implemented
create the new directory structure then -- that way the new
uploads will get put away in the new system and the old stuff
will stay where it is, leaving mirrors to only deal with new
files anyway (incidentally, this is a _REALLY_ long sentence!)?

Anything dangling in the old dir structure after the next next
(huh?) release (1.4?) could be moved without killing mirrors, I
think.

> 
> It's much easier to have only two levels:
> 
> 	main distribution: you can do pretty much anything, except
> 		claim you wrote it, as long as you don't put new
> 		restrictions on it; as far as we know, 
> 
> 	non-free: there's something funny about the legal issues,
> 		please examine and decide for yourself
> 

Ahhh.  So there will be two points at the root level -- stable
and unstable?  Underneath the distributions as you layed out
above?  Is this how it will look?

/debian
	stable -> link to codename/Debian-x.x.x
	unstable -> link to codenamea/debian
	non-free-stable -> link to codename/non-free (??)
	contrib-stable -> link to codename/contrib
	non-US-stable	-> link to codename/non-US (??)
	codename/
		non-free/
		non-US/
		Debian-x.x.x -> mixed bag of links to
				  debian and fixes
		fixed (still needed?)
		fixes/ (where fixes to "debian" go?)
		updates (links to Debian-x.x.x that identify
			   diffs btwn last release and this?)
		debian/ (the contents of the initial release?)
		contrib/
	non-free-unstable -> link to codenamea/non-free
	non-US-unstable -> link to codenamea/non-us
	contrib-unstable -> link to codenamea/contrib
	codenamea/
		non-free/
		debian/
		contrib/
		non-US/

Still not quite clear on this but I think I'm getting warmer ;-)

Thanks

Richard G. Roberto
richr@bear.com
011-81-3-3437-7967 - Tokyo, Japan


--
*******************************************************************************
Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation, offer or
agreement or any information about any transaction, customer account or account
activity contained in this communication.
*******************************************************************************


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com