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

Re: BOSS is back ?? Seems like Yes !

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Amey Abhyankar wrote:

> 'Debian Derivatives' mailing list which may be useful to Hamara Linux
> developers =  https://lists.debian.org/debian-derivatives/
> I would like to encourage Hamara Linux developers to keep posting
> updates/queries at above mailing list.

If you managed to rebase on Debian instead of Ubuntu it would be great
if Hamara Linux folks could join the Debian derivatives census too:


> Now back to 'BOSS'. Found 1 interesting short communication thread at this
> ML from back in Dec 2014 =
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-derivatives/2014/12/msg00014.html

Unfortunately we didn't get any details about what was happening with
BOSS back then, but here are some links:


For those on debian-derivatives, the context of the discussion below
is this thread on the Debian Indian users mailing list:


To me the discussion about suing seems to be jumping to conclusions
without evidence.

>> On २२ सप्टेंबर, २०१५ २:१४:३५ [PM] IST, Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi BOSS Linux and others,
>>> [cc'ing Prema S. as formal C-DAC contact at Debian census page]
>>> Quoting Amey Abhyankar (2015-09-22 08:25:27)
>>>>  On 22 September 2015 at 11:23, BOSS Linux <bosslinux.cdac@gmail.com>
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>  BOSS is officially a part of Debian Derivatives
>>>>  Fantastic!
>>> Yup.  I fully agree it is great that BOSS is based on Debian (which is
>>> no news - BOSS was based on Debian also last I checked 4 years ago too),
>>> and even greater to learn that it is still actively maintained.
>>>>  -Can some1 add
>>>> information about BOSS here? I don't have access to
>>>>  edit this page = http://www.debian.org/misc/children-distros
>>> There's info here: https://wiki.debian.org/Derivatives/Census/BOSSlinux
>>> That page is used also by automated tools, so edit with caution.
>>>>>  and the Official BOSS  releases for public domain contains packages
>>>>>  ONLY from main section of Debian and thus there is no question of
>>>>>  "suing" for any reason.
>>> I fully agree there's no reason to sue¹ BOSS here.  But it is incorrect
>>> that public accessible BOSS is a
>>> Debian Pure Blend - some parts are not
>>> pristine Debian packages but derived.  To take an example, the package
>>> "alacarte" was patched to include Kashmiri languages:
>>> http://deriv.debian.net/BOSSlinux/patches/a/alacarte/alacarte_0.13.2-1_alacarte_0.13.2-1boss2.patch
>>> During my brief visit to India in 2011 I met with C-DAC and we discussed
>>> ways to improve relationship with Debian.  C-DAC then sent 3 of their
>>> developers to our MiniDebconf in Mangalore with few days notice, and
>>> sponsored my travel costs while in India (I met with students in
>>> Hyderabad, Mengaluru and Bengaluru).
>>> Sadly those developers left the company few months after our meetings,
>>> as far as I heard, and C-DAC and I didn't keep in touch in other ways.
>>> Would C-DAC perhaps be interested in a renewed effort to work closer?
>>> My girlfriend and I will likely visit India at the end on 2015, this
>>> time with specific aim of collaborating closely with Debian derivatives.
>>> Would C-DAC be interested in e.g. hosting Siri and me in Chennai in two
>>> weeks of december to work for 2 weeks directly with BOSS developers?
>>> Would other Debian enthusiasts happen to be in or near Chennai at the
>>> time and be interested in attending such work sessions or some of them?
>>> Kind regards,
>>>  - Jonas
>>> ¹ I agree also with others in this thread that an eventual lawsuit would
>>> be for copyright holders to consider: Debian mainly distributes code of
>>> others and hold copyright only for small pieces like the installer.
>>> ² Sadly for C-DAC - as I was told the developers themselves were excited
>>> about their new opportunities.



Reply to: