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

Re: Is Ubuntu a debian derivative or is it a fork?

On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 01:07:11AM -0700, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 03:12:02AM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> I didn't say "always", but so far we have done this with every package
> modified by Ubuntu.  However, the situation with X.org seems quite different
> to me, given your explanation that the packages were created independently.
> What it assumes is merely that Ubuntu's X.org packages would be suitable for
> Debian, and that the right people at Debian were aware of their existence at
> the time.

I'm sorry, this turned out to be very long-winded, but since many people
are interested in what's going on with X.Org, I may as well explain to a
larger audience than debian-x what's in store.

What I've decided to do with X.Org is a compromise. I'm using the Ubuntu
packages as a base, but I've spent the last month doing as careful an audit
of them as I can, comparing them to the XFree86 packaging, and reverting
what changes I don't agree with, keeping the ones that I like, etc.

Furthermore, Branden has had plans to shift the packaging to a different
patch system, and we plan to move ahead with that as soon as we have X.Org
packages in the archive. We'll be branching off the trunk which is derived
from the modified Ubuntu packaging, so while we're using the Ubuntu
packages as a base (which were the Debian packages originally anyway) we're
going to make some radical changes to the system. This packaging can
potentially be used for the X.Org 6.9 release, which will be the last
monolithic version to be releaseed during the transition to a modular tree.
We may never release 6.9 packages in Debian, but this will provide us with
a good foundation for it if we do. This work will be done independantly of
Ubuntu (as no one from Ubuntu seems interested in helping) so we'll go it

As the upstream X.Org tree gets modularized, we're going to begin to work
on packaging that instead. My personal preference is to use the modular
tree (which will be entirely equivalent to the 6.9 release otherwise,
except called 7.0) but if it's not ready for us, we can stick with 6.9, so
as to get the latest drivers to our users.  Members of both the XSF,
including myself and Josh Triplett (who's already begun this work) and
Ubuntu developers (Daniel Stone) will be working on this together. My goal
is to have as close a tree for both Ubuntu and Debian as possible,
preferrably the same tree, but again we'll have to see what happens. I plan
to use the patch system Branden and I will develop for the monolithic tree
in the modular tree, and if the Ubuntu developers decide that this isn't
the best option then they can go their own route, unless they can
demonstrate that an alternate system is preferrable.

So the reality of the situation is that it seems as though we can cooperate
and remain independant. I'm personally very grateful the Daniel, Fabio, and
anyone else who worked on X.Org packaging for Ubuntu, since it's given me a
boost in getting it in to the archive (almost there!) and I look forward to
collaborating more with them in the future. Despite this, Debian will
remain independant, at least with respect to X.Org, in the future. I share
Daniel's ambition to have up to date X packages in Debian, and I plan to
work to make this a reality so that we don't have these kinds of
discussions in the future. 

I'd be surprised if there wasn't a more thorny relationship between Debian
and Ubuntu than in X packaging, but if we can make it work then I urge
everyone else to try and do the same. The fighting will only harm us all.

 - David Nusinow

Reply to: