Re: status of Progeny projects
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 04:32:26PM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Ben Collins wrote:
> > In fact, the d-i team thossed out other people's work and started from
> > scratch.
> > In fact, Progeny took an existing installer and ported it. Making use of
> > existing work, and building upon its success.
> > Which means Progeny took the approach you are trying to lobby for, and
> > the d-i team is the one that should be bitched at.
> > Note, I am not trying to toss an egg at d-i, just pointing out the
> > irony in your logic.
> Was Anaconda at a similar usable state some years ago when work on the
> debian-installer was started? If not, your argument is bogus.
I'm willing to bet that Anaconda was more usable than d-i when Progeny
made the decision to start working on it.
> Throwing away boot-floppies was mostly agreed upon because it became
> unmaintainable again.
And Progeny is bound to this decision, how? They put up their own money
to help out, and you get your power to spit on them for it from where?
Debian - http://www.debian.org/
Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/
Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/