Re: "dselect" replacement team
Michael Alan Dorman <mdorman@calder.med.miami.edu> writes:
> At this point, I'm not overly impressed with the direction this team
> seems to be heading---it seems to be more oriented towards the ivory
> tower ideal of "We'll use all the best possible tools", instead of the
> more utilitarian "We'll use the minimum of tools to get our work
> done".
A MeeTo.
As I gathered, the aims are:
- easier installation
- splitting into frontend(s) and backend
I'd like to see the first thing done soon, and the second is a
long-term goal.
The major problem with dselect is that people are forced to understand
it during the initial installation; before they have seen any
advantage of Debian.
The obvious solution is to provide some profiles, e.g. minimal system,
development system, network server and probably some more.
So dselect should have an alternative "simple selection" that offers
these profiles.
Someone has to create these profiles, and system configured by these
profiles are the primary target systems for the testing group.
I see no need to do a complete rewrite for this.
Regarding the splitting I am not sure, but I doubt that a rewrite will
buy us anything. Please consider that the resulting system must run in
4MB RAM with acceptable responsivness. C++ doesn't look like the right
choice.
Sven
--
Sven Rudolph <sr1@inf.tu-dresden.de> ; WWW : http://www.sax.de/~sr1/
Reply to: