possible compromise for ITP: linux?
The discussion doesn't seem to be very productive any more.
Time to come to a compromise?
Obviously, Robert is not going to retreat.
He has put much time in posting already and hopefully will
spend much more time in making a good package (if this is
possible). So let him build his package.
OTOH, most people (publicly) stating anything about his ITP
had objections against the package as a whole or the name
or missing features or other things.
What about letting Robert build and upload (if ftp-masters agree)
his package, *if* he puts it in experimental, uses a description
that contains a warning about the experimental status of the
package in a prominent place, and not calling it "linux", but...
(Robert, please choose. linux-tng, linux-experimental and other
names have been proposed). If all works out fine and such packages
eventually become the standard way of installing the linux kernel,
the name could be changed then (as well as distrubution and description).
If it's not working, an important package name stays usable.
All who object on such packaging could help improve the package
- or show that it's not feasible - by testing it and filing
(serious, fair) bug reports.
Just my 2 Euro cents,
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected
us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms,
munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music."
Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989