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

Re: Are we losing users to Gentoo?

On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:59:08PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 10:14:32PM +1100, Glenn McGrath wrote:
> > I think debian is stagnating technically and that our social structure is
> > the cause of it.
> > We have a lot of technically talented people, if we worked together we
> > could overcome any technical problem, but how often does it happen ?
> What are the outstanding technical problems that we are unable to
> solve? The only one I can think of is the gcc-3.2 (g++) transition.

On the design side:

Creating an installer that we can maintain with effort proportional to
new features, not random-changes * new-features * number-of-arches. d-i's
an attempt at this, we're yet to see if it works.

Working out how to manage tens of thousands of packages in a way that
makes it easy for the admin to find packages that are useful, and only
keep useful packages installed. There are some probably good ideas in
aptitude with this.

On the implementation side:

Fixing apt to support (a) Release files, (b) incremental Packages updates,
(c) i18n-ized Packages files. Fixing apt-ftparchive to generate Release
files, incremental Packages diffs.

Fixing glibc 2.3.1.

Fixing wanna-build so it can handle building more than the few hardcoded
suites it currently does. (So experimental and other suites can be autobuilt)

Fixing Hurd so it's releasable.

"Unable to solve" is probably too strong for these, but it's too strong
for gcc-3.2, too; among a couple of other minor things, we need to
resolve bug #168888.

> Our installation process is one of the main criticisms in all of the
> reviews. 

There're plenty more things we can be legitimately criticised for beyond
just that.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

 ``If you don't do it now, you'll be one year older when you do.''

Attachment: pgpPocIQLaJSX.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: