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

Re: Comments on Mate DE

On 09/20/2012 01:58 AM, superuserlaptop wrote:
Mate Desktop environment (http://www.mate-desktop.org)

I am writing in support of Mate DE. In less than a year a few people
have designed an alternative to Gnome 3.

I have been averaging one reconditioned HP Compaq nc6400 laptop per
quarter year, four per year. This is one of my contributions to Debian
and Linux.

I give these out to individuals who do not have a computer and cannot
afford one and have very limited computer skills.

I use Debian with a Mate DE. The reports back so far from everyone that
has received a laptop that they like the way it handles better than
Windows or Apple.

It has been a simple process until now September 18, 2012. Just as in
the past Debian broke OpenOffice and substituted LibreOffice.

You can't say it this way. At the maximum, you could say that the maintainer
of OpenOffice decided to follow the LibreOffice branch rather than the
Apache OpenOffice one. It's not a "decision" that Debian made, but the
choice of a maintainer, who spent quite a large amount of time on it.

If you want to maintain Apache OpenOffice in Debian, please do, but first
explain to us why we would need to support both. As I understand, the
LibreOffice suite adds patches and features to the Apache OpenOffice,
when the other way isn't truth.

It was a
major effort to undo the damage caused by that action.

What damage are you talking about? I'm really happy with LibreOffice

I have still not
completely repaired the damage of lost components to Open Office. Which
I have finally reinstalled.

What components?

You are now allowing OO to live side by side with LO. This is as it
should be.

I don't think anyone forbid that. If that was the case, please give
a reference where you read that it wasn't allowed to maintain both
packages in Debian.

But again you have taken a similar action to Mate.

Could you define these actions? I don't think anyone willingly
tried to break the compatibility with Mate.

This to me is a form of sabotage.

Come on!!! Please don't use such bad words, I don't think anyone
in Debian is trying to do any kind of sabotage.

I understand that Mate is not totally
in line with the philosophy of Debian, but they are getting there.

Why do you think so? I never read that Debian has something against
Mate or any other open source project.

What better way to create good will for Debian and Linux than to do this

Debian isn't a company. If you wish to see Mate in Debian, then please
maintain its packages.

Yet someone decided that this would not be.

Who exactly are you talking about?

There is a difference
between endorsing, or not, a program, to breaking it because someone did
not like what it was doing.

Please give a reference here.

Debian has had this attitude of doing it the Debian way or leave.

Again, please give references.

It is the same with some of the programs that are available, the only
way to use them is to go up into SID. The components to the software
always stay in SID.

Well, after some times in SID, packages goes in testing, then when the new
stable is released, it goes to Stable. These are very well established rules in Debian, and I see no problem with it. If you want more updated software, then
please do switch to testing. What problem do you have with testing anyway?

Yet this causes problems with the system that can
only be rectified by turning off updates.

This is why, I do not allow updates from Debian. I do for Mate and
Multimedia. I have been burned too often by Debian.

Again, no reference to any specific issue, so we can't help.

Yet Debian is a very good operating system when this self-rightious
attitude is not involved.

Again, Debian is composed with a set of people. Accusing the entire
project like this doesn't help, and isn't nice (you are attacking about
1000 people at the same time...). And it wont make things better...
Instead, please explain what your problem is, and point to specific
issues. That would be a lot more constructive.

There has been limited discussions about forking Debian to get away from
these problems that make life measurable.

According to distrowatch, there's 139 Debian derivatives. So there
has been a little more than "limited discussions"...

It is time for the people who make the decisions at Debian that there is
a very strong cause and effect relationship between what you do and how
well the community will operate.

What community are you talking about? Do you mean "users"?

By adding problems that are not technical but solely the opinion of one
or two or even a handful of people is destructive.

If you are again talking about Gnome or Mate support or OpenOffice, then again,
please feel free to contribute and address the issues.

I have always encouraged people to financially help with a few dollars
to free programs. Again this year I do not encourage financial support
for Debian. Last year you lost this endorsement because of Open Office.
This year because of Mate.

By giving to Debian, you aren't forcing your will on some maintainers. Nobody can force anyone to do anything in Debian, it's all volunteer driven. Instead, you should discuss with each individual maintainers, or even better, contribute

So do you fix this problem with Mate, or do talks continue about forking
off of Debian? A position I do not currently hold.

Well, best would be to find a maintainer for Mate, I believe. But it'd better
be someone serious, because that's a lot of work.

In fact I would encourage talks for combining the many Linux
distribution with a solid kernel format so that the differences become
that of enhancements for specific tasks, based upon a single format.
This will mean that for Linux only one program style will need to be
developed. Thus leaving to the differences in kernel modules the process
for making the many distributions of Linux.

Sorry, but things doesn't technically work this way. The issue isn't the kernel.

As an example of how I see things, even though I deplored your stunt
with OO and LO, I would be just as angry if you now broke LO even though
I will not use it because of the method that it was forced upon me. And
yes, OO is still a better suite than LO. Apache has stepped up and made
the needed changes.

Why is it better? The patch statistics don't agree with you, unless this has
changed recently.

It is now time for you and your associates to make some decisions.

There's no "associates". Debian isn't a company. It's only volunteers.


Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Reply to: