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

Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel

 > It's not "cosmetic". The point is it has a completely different
 > packaging style and philosophy. I want to package the Linux kernel in
 > the same way the rest of Debian is packaged, that's all.

 Until now you have failed to provide a reason for that, other than
 cosmetic reasons.

 Please _define_ your target user base, and do make an effort to be more
 verbose than just "new linux user" becuase that's becoming a mythical
 hydra.  GNOME's ill-defined "newbie" can't be your "newbie".  Your
 newbie is downloading patches for the _kernel_, _reconfiguring_ it and
 _compiling_ it.  If your newbie is able to do that, he can just go read
 kernel-package's documentation, too, so your target userbase has to be
 special in a way that I just haven't seen.

 > If you have more ideas that improve my packages in that field
 > _without_ breaking its current packaging style and philosophy (which
 > is the whole point), they're welcome as I said.

 _That_ is the point of your packaging: you don't like the current
 packaging for whatever reason and want a different one.  I hope you
 don't mind Mesa's packaging, because I'd be rather pissed if suddenly
 someone comes with the great idea of creating mesa-cdbs just for the
 sake of it.  If someone wants to work on such a thing I won't stop
 them.  If they send patches I'll look at them.  But it will take a good
 deal of talking to convince me that that _per se_ is better.

 > As I said a thousand times, if an architecture is unsupportable, not
 > supporting it is an option.

 So, your package _can't_ be the default kernel package, because that
 needs to be supported on all architectures the installer supports.
 Which makes me wonder again: what is your target userbase?


Reply to: