On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 18:44:26 +0200 Moritz Mühlenhoff <jmm@inutil.org> wrote: > Karl Goetz <karl@kgoetz.id.au> schrieb: > > >> I think it's sufficient for starters to provide images for stable > >> (they can be updated for every few point updates if needed). > >>=20 > >> What virtualisation solutions should be supported? > > > >> - Vmware has a significant installed base and is relevant, although > >> proprietary > >> - Microsoft Virtual PC is likely also needed > >> - Citrix XenServer? > > > > Would this require the Debian project to go out and buy various > > bits of proprietary software to build the images with? > > No money will need to be spend. There will surely be people, who > have access to such systems at work. At least VMware also offers > free-as-in-beer variants like vmware server or ESXi. (IIRC) I always thought the player was the only free vmware, but I'm completely out of that space. > I don't see a problem with offering Debian in proprietary virt > formats, it's essentially comparable to the FSF offering builds for > of the GNU userland for proprietary Unixes; to provide people an > initial stepstone to get out of their proprietary mess. It seems bizarre to me that we require packages to build using software in main to be 'debian', but we wouldn't require it for images distributed as being 'debian'. thanks, kk -- Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS) Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer http://www.kgoetz.id.au No, I won't join your social networking group
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature