On Sat, 2002-12-28 at 16:45, Michael Stone wrote: > On Fri, Dec 27, 2002 at 02:03:50AM -0500, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote: > >Yes and isn't the fact we don't "end of life" distributions when there is > >no more money to be made from them a a benefit? > > No, we end of life them arbitrarily when we don't feel like working on > them anymore. I'm not sure that's a distinct advantage. (Or are you > aware of any contractual obligation for debian to continue working on > sparc and alpha in perpetuity?) The distinct advantage is that - anyone may theoretically keep an architecture alive and, more importantly, - it is very likely that if an architecture is not kept alive in Debian, it is really dead. I mean, really really. It is unlikely (probably even practically impossible) that at one point a few core developers decide 'and now we stop architecture X', as long as interested people can be found who would take over. I have quite some confidence that the second argument holds for the next few years; enough so that I would recommend Debian as the distribution of choice, especially on strange hardware. cheers -- vbi -- this email is protected by a digital signature: http://fortytwo.ch/gpg
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part