Re: [custom] Debian Enterprise - packages
On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 14:45:51 +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> As per the recommendations from Bruce Perens' User Linux paper
> http://userlinux.com/white_paper.html, this thread is to discuss the
> applications within the bounded set of Debian Enterprise/ User Linux.
I think discussing the favorite applications, at this point, is a bit
premature. Debian Enterprise (DE) should be concentrating on the
framework that will make flavors possible. There is much that remains to be
done on the technical level (kernels, a distribution that is up-to-date
enough that companies will _want_ to use it, an installer, etc). Deciding
what applications to supply isn't of much use right now (especially given
the rate of development of some; mozilla-firebird may be a good choice
now, but what about when epiphany or another alternative becomes the
Remember the original goals that DE is attempting to solve.
Current Debian-using companies must maintain their own package backports,
kernels, and so on. Deciding what browser we will default to, while
possibly helping in standardization, is a long ways off. In order for DE
to become useful, we must cater to companies (not the other way around).
Thus, we should build out the infrastructure enough so that DE, by itself,
is installable and useable. At that point, we can start worrying about
what flavors will contain what software.
> The bounded set will depend on the flavour. So first comes proposed
> flavours (and sub-flavours/ tasks/ yadda) - see previous email/ thread.
> Here are some initial (obviously debatable and incomplete) selections to
> start out the bounded-apps conversation:
> * Web Browser
> - Mozilla-Firebird
> I've used Mozilla, Galeon in its day, more recently Epiphany, and the
> last few months Moz-Firebird. It is simply the simplest (and in my
> opinion best) of the crop.
> * Web Server - Apache 2.0 (let's get with the times)
> * Open SSH Implementation - OpenSSH (much more active that gnu version)
> * Office Suite - OpenOffice (there's no other near as feature complete)
> * Scripting Language - Python (no one will debate this one :)
> - I have never used, only read (plenty) about Python, and I'm not
> personally too sure about this white space thing, but from what I hear
> about it (quite consistently) eventually feeling more "natural" than
> anything else, I am inclined to believe this really is the case. My
> experience with Java (after C/C++) was sort of like that, and if Python
> is more so, then I think it could be closest to the next VB replacement.
> Some client of some service provider may however commission completion
> of VB clone, or VB# or whatever.
> - MONO (go-mono.org/net/com?) is from the sound of it may be a year
> away, but perhaps that's a reasonable time frame, if we were to go with
> .NET/MONO for scripting.
> - Java - I think this is the only other reasonable alternative, and
> should perhaps be the first choice (due to being as entrenched as it is
> in middleware/ corporate) - there are a few Free Software
> implementations, including one fully integrated with GCC toolchain
> (which I think is just too sweet) - namely gcj.
> * Mail Server - Postfix (scales more than exim, not as restrictive to
> admiinister as qmail).
> * Package format (had you going there - obviously DEBs!)
> Please add to the list as per your personal exprience dictates.