Re: RH and GNOME
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, 21 Jul 1998 email@example.com wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jul 1998, Shaleh wrote:
> > Everyone using GNOME is now a RH knockoff. For the newbie, the only
> > reason to use another distribution is to get KDE. So esssentially SuSE
> > and Redhat are now the only two of importance.
> You are forgetting some unique selling points of Debian:
> - Debian is a group of volunteers;
> - Debian is committed to Free Software;
Forgive me for being frank, and don't get me wrong I'm all for debian. but
these "selling points" are not selling points at all, and won't mean jack
in the long run. Corparations will look and say, hum a package put
together, by a company, or the same package put together by a group of
vollenteers. uh, the vollenteers could have sabotauged the package...
nope, gonna go with the one I can sue. ... (Not saying that anyone would
sabotauge a deb package... but...) Debian is by far the best linux dist
(IMO) but if the current mentality of "lets build a technical os" does not
change, debian will die. SOME attention should be paid to users, and other
non-programer types. we are all for the advocation of linux, until it
means carring for our users. Rh has gotten past that. while there system
may have more bugs, not follow the fhs, or whatever, it's a very useable
system, perfect for those, who want to USE linux not develope linux.
Your selling point of commited to free software is a good one, but it to
is also, not much of a selling point. while I dissagree with the sedalment
of putting kde into main, distributing binarys in contrib or a installer
package, is a good thing, as only free software is a good/bad thing.
gpl/artistic has it's flaws. lets use some of our colective knowlage, and
cash (read this fully before yelling) to come up with a set of licence
goals, and hire a lawyer to write it up. shouldn't be to expensive....
I've also heard how we gave money to gnome. (I for one forsaw Rh's
takeover of gnome a long time ago.) so maybe we should drop gnome and help
the harmony group develop harmony... or ggi lets get that working... then
debian can have it's own gui... (that was admitedly a half formed
> Others might add that Debian has the easiest maintenance for the sysadmin,
> doesn't require you to wait for the errata before you upgrade, has
> close-knit integration of all its packages, has a real bug tracking
> system, has the most packages of all distributions and can boast
> technical excellence on many points, but those are more or less
> coincidental to the Debian goals.
Most of these Rh has to, or is currently developing.
> > This iwhat bothers me.
> As long as RedHat stays committed to GPL in the software they produce,
> what is the problem for Debian? IMHO the benefits of having good
> free software outweighs the disadvantages of having to (de)customize it
> for Debian's specific purposes.
> Given RedHat's current support of the GPL, any fears for future adverse
> decisions by RedHat are both ungrounded and irrelevant, because Debian can
> fork off any last GPL'ed version.
Thats an awfly broad statment. yeah we can. but will we? ... can we muster
enouph developers with enouph time to do it? ... Hell we can't even get a
release out in under a year, and you want to develop More?
Particle man, Particle man
Doing the things a Particle can
Whats he like? Its not important
Particle man is he a dot, or is he a speck
When He's underwater does he get wet, or does the water get him instead?
- -Particle Man, by They Might Be Giants.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com