Re: If Debian wants to grow, let it grow. Or: King James reading Anarchy FAQ

[James LewisMoss <dres@ioa.com>]

>>>>> On Sun, 21 Mar 1999 15:21:20 +0000, Dave Swegen <dave@recursive.prestel.co.uk> said:

 Dave> On Sun, Mar 21, 1999 at 02:27 +0000, Enrique Zanardi wrote:
 >> On Fri, Mar 19, 1999 at 10:16:56PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
 >>
 >> Still we need some rules to decide what we include and what we
 >> refuse to include on the distribution.

 Dave> As I see it packages fall into one of three categories:

 Dave> 1) Programs
 Dave> 2) Data associated with programs (ie King James, fortune,
 Dave>    websters)

I don't see any distinction between this data and any other non-Debian 
data.  Just because it has a special reader for it does not make it
any more relevant.  If I format a collection of anarchy docs as a
fortune file does it suddenly become includable?  (Just as an example
of current situation and because my imagination is lacking today. :)

 Dave> 3) Data associated with linux/debian (FAQs, HOWTOs, policy
 Dave>    manuals)

 Dave> (I could of course be entirely wrong about those categories,
 Dave> but I really can't be arsked to trawl through the 2.5k+
 Dave> packages that we already have)

 Dave> IMHO I think this is as good a set of criteria as any other,
 Dave> and ensures a modicum of relevancy. Debian is growing fast
 Dave> enough as it is w/o having every single piece of use{full|less}
 Dave> info on the net debianised and bunged into the dist.

I think one and three are good, but if you include two you must
include other non-Debian related data (I'd personally make an
exception for fortune (it's ubiquitous) and dict (it's useful), but if 
we are to include the Bible then everything is fair game from that
point (IMO of course)).

Dres
-- 
@James LewisMoss <dres@ioa.com>         |  Blessed Be!
@    http://www.ioa.com/~dres           |  Linux is kewl!
@"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach