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

Re: Debian Re-organization proposals (was: Re: so what?)

On Mon, Jun 01, 1998 at 08:21:23PM -0500, David Engel wrote:
> > David, I'm certain SOMETHING will come of it.  Hang in there.  If we all do,
> > something will get done.  I'm certainly interested and willing to help in
> > any capacity I can once we decide what exactly we're gonna do.  =>
> I sincerely hope you are right that something [good] will come of it.
> I'm still skeptical.

Faith manages.

> To clarify, I am not expecting Ian to get deeply involved in
> developing the plan for the next release, though he would be more than
> welcome to join.  I am, however, expecting Ian to give his full
> endorsement of the effort and commitment to follow through on the
> resulting plan.

Once we have a consensus of what we're doing, I agree.

> I think we are getting way ahead of ourselves here.  The idea
> expressed above is an implementation strategy.  I would much rather
> see us start with a discussion on goals for the next release.

That's a good beginning.

> Examples of the goals I think should be considered, include but is
> certainly not limited to the following:
> 	Whether or not to adopt apt.

This has been decided already in favor of adopting it as soon as a few bugs
are worked out in the system and the GUI works AFAIK.  This is good.

> 	Whether or not to conform to FHS.

I think we should make it a goal, but not a release-critical one.  From what
I've seen there is no reason why we have to make sure EVERY package is FHS
compliant if it's still FSSTND compliant and hasn't been updated yet. 
Still, I think FHS should be policy as soon as hamm is out the door.

> 	Whether or not to adopt linuxconf.

I would say that if all it takes is beefing up sysvinit scripts, then YES at
least as an optional package.  Adopting sysvinit as a standard package would
mean that the standard MTA would be sendmail--not smail as it is now among
other things.  

> 	Choosing a target date for the release.
> Only after we have reached a consensus on goals, should the discussion
> move on to implementation strategies.

Lets figure out what we want before we figure out when to have it by.  Other
issues in my mind include:

Do we try to migrate to glibc 2.1?  Is it likely to be stable enough in time
or is this something that should wait till whatever comes after slink?

Are we going to try to revamp the ftp structure?  We've been talking about
this and we have some pretty good ideas collectively.  I've been off
collecting some of them from the threads on the subject and will post more
when I have had a chance to arg^H^H^Hdebate it with some people who are a
little more experienced than I.

Attachment: pgpaHDhva8sQC.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: