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

Re: Integrating aptosid?

On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 12:23:45PM -0400, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> FWIW my 1 cent: the idea is really sound although a bit idealistic,
> because it goes inline with my utopian future of Debian: many
> derivatives are just customizations of Debian with varying level of
> additional custom extensions (often DFSG-compliant thus candidates for
> inclusion into Debian proper) + installer or live-media options; i.e.
> they are using Debian package base and add some additional packages (or
> manual installations/customizations just because it might be easier at
> first)
> So at the end, is there any objective show stopper to
> hypothetically have in a Debian metapackages like
> N.B. couldn't come up with a good prefix, so let it be 'flavor'
>  flavor-aptosid
>  flavor-mint
>  flavor-neurodebian
> ...
> installation of which would simply tune existing plain Debian
> installation to actually become the derivative itself?
> if only we could persuade and collaborate with derivatives authors to
> make this possible and easy.  Then derivative projects could concentrate
> on providing custom installers/live-media and everyone would be happy.
> Or am I missing some substantial design issue which is still lacking
> from http://wiki.debian.org/Derivatives/Guidelines

Sounds like the "Debian Pure Blends" [0] [1], with the difference that they
seem to use tasks instead of metapackages if I understood it correclty. 

I don't know what's the state of the project though, maybe someone more 
involved in it can comment further.


[0] http://wiki.debian.org/DebianPureBlends
[1] http://blends.alioth.debian.org/blends/

perl -E'$_=q;$/= @{[@_]};and s;\S+;<inidehG ordnasselA>;eg;say~~reverse'

Reply to: