Re: If Debian wants to grow, let it grow. Or: King James reading Anarchy FAQ
On Sun, Mar 21, 1999 at 16:09 -0500, James LewisMoss wrote:
> >>>>> 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. :)
Basically because I feel that the line should be drawn somewhere - I
certainly don't feel like paying for 10 CDs in a couple of years time, most
of them filled with stuff which I have absolutely no interest in, and which
I can without great difficulty look up on the net.
>
> 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)).
Like it or not the bible is a major work of reference (ask any crossword
fanatic). But if there wasn't a program that used it I would probably say
no, it doesn't go in - go get it at Gutenberg or wherever. Others do this
sort of thing far better than Debian could (as someone else pointed out).
FWIW I'm no great fan of religion (at least the organised kind)...
Cheers
Dave
--
Dave Swegen | Debian 2.0 on Linux i386 2.2.3
<dave@recursive.prestel.co.uk> | PGP key available on request
<dsw@debian.org> | Linux: The Choice of a GNU Generation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: