Re: OT to Debian [Was: RFC/ITP: Constitution of Finland]
- To: Pedro Guerreiro <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Cc: Bob Hilliard <email@example.com>, Debian Developers <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: OT to Debian [Was: RFC/ITP: Constitution of Finland]
- From: Fabrizio Polacco <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 17:26:25 +0300
- Message-id: <20000420172625.B549@none>
- In-reply-to: <20000419234452.B18264@bigfoot.com>; from firstname.lastname@example.org on Wed, Apr 19, 2000 at 11:44:52PM +0100
- References: <38FAA775.C3C7CBF@efore.fi> <Pine.LNX.3.96.1000418162941.12874Aemail@example.com> <20000418182207.A19701@simpukka.sci.fi> <20000418185012.C9315@hell.rassun.art.pl> <20000418202723.J26564@gaia.pp.sci.fi> <20000419101520.A1028@hell.rassun.art.pl> <20000419114744.C586@cibalia.gkvk.hr> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20000419234452.B18264@bigfoot.com>
On Wed, Apr 19, 2000 at 11:44:52PM +0100, Pedro Guerreiro wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2000 at 04:46:37PM -0400, Bob Hilliard wrote:
> > When the data section was first proposed on -policy, it included
> > some proposed rules for what should go in data. These seemed to get
> > lost along the way. I believe the original proposal provided that
> > data files that required specialized programs to access the data in the
> > intended manner would not go into the data section. This would
> I'm sorry, but with this reasoning, wouldn't all data be out of 'data'?
> IIRC, the data section came along because somebody wanted to package a
> monstrous amount of scientific data (I really don't remember what this data
> was all about). Well, wouldn't this data needed a "specialized program to
> access" it? And consequently be moved out of the 'data' section?
> /me just confused
I notice that a lot of people say things like "move data out of _main_".
Well, my original proposal was that the "data section" is created at the
same level of the "distributions" (with potato, woody, sid), not at the
In fact it should have a "main", "contrib" and "non-free" subdivision
itself, like potato or woody, depending on the status of their
copyright/licence, and even of the location of the program needed to
access the data. Public domain data that need a non-free program to be
processed/used, go in data/contrib ... etc.
The need of putting the "data" at the distribution level, comes from the
different "scope" of the "data".
What would be the purpose of "freezing" the bible?
What would be the utility of not permitting new entry in the package
"weekly-news" for the 3 or 4 months of the freeze?
These where the two major concerns coming from the inclusion of data
packages in the distribution; the size cames only later.
Data need to be immediately available, and tend to be highly stable.
the "data" distribution address both of these concerns and gives the
"room" advantage as a plus.
| email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
| pgp: 6F7267F5 57 16 C4 ED C9 86 40 7B 1A 69 A1 66 EC FB D2 5E
| email@example.com gsm: +358 (0)40 707 2468