[Freedombox-discuss] my summary of yesterday's Hackfest
Please beware that you mess up the quoting slightly - often first line
of a quote has too few indentation markers, making it display as if you
are quoting someone else!
(and please don't blame it on your mail application: ultimately you are
in charge and can use a different one if it serves you badly!)
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:40:27AM +0000, Matt Willsher wrote:
>On 2 March 2011 11:01, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 08:10:57AM +0000, Matt Willsher wrote:
>>> On 1 March 2011 22:33, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 08:04:02PM +0000, Matt Willsher wrote:
>>> I have 5 users in my household. I have 1 admin, 2 power users and 3
>>> users. Those groups each have different privileges mapped out in
>>> sudo. The power users are allowed to restart apache and kick off
>>> backup. The admin can become ultimate root. All valid users can map
>>> to one central user to manage a bittorrent server.
>> Ok, so in your household you are sysadmin.
>I am but how could this case possibly be configured by the Debian sudo
>package? Or what if the roles of the people in the household change? Or
>what if more people are needed or a new role?
Ahem - you cut off the part where I tried explain that. :-P
Please try reply again to my former post, and comment also on that
section right below above quote.
>> Debian Policy ?10.7.3 contains:
>>> The scripts [which are embedded into a package and invoked during
>>> install and removal] are not required to configure every possible
>>> option for the package, but only those necessary to get the package
>>> running on a given system. Ideally the sysadmin should not have to
>>> do any configuration other than that done (semi-)automatically by
>>> the `postinst' script.
>I believe this is a naive view of how systems work and if followed to
>its ultimate conclusion removes freedoms and limits choice.
Was it not for that (semi-) paranthesis, I would agree with you.
Lots and lots of the approx. 30.000 official Debian packages currently
"removes freedoms and limits choice" when looking only at what is
possible with the packaging - not messing with configs by hand.
But you know what? It will stay that way, if you users of Debian do not
expect more, and file bugreports about the flexibility you'd want Debian
So in a sense your very attitude is to blame for Debian being as it is!
>I did find the debconf overview page on the Debian site and it struck
>me as an incomplete.
Debian consists of 100% volunteers. Yes, you can find lots and lots of
loose ends, like lousy documentation.
Perhaps you listened to the interview with me, listed at the foundation
website and our wiki page. Shortly after, I received an email from Joey
Hess - the maintainer and (I believe) main author of debconf -
correcting me in several facts that I got wrong about debconf and
debian-installer in that interview.
>I will read more on the subject as I think I believe in Debian's aims
>and I think I would like to believe in its aims. I've drifted through
>distributions long enough now to want to find one I can help.
My point above is, I guess, that maybe you should trust not only
documents but - at least as much - voices. Due to our anarchistic way
of living that organism called Debian.
>> Hope that helps.
>> And hope you will change your mind and work _with_ Debian also on
>> this front, rather than "hacking on top"!
>I prefer to view it as developing on top. Debian, RHEL, Solaris, AIX
>etc are the important foundations. I just don't see how a software
>package can become all things to all people with out additional glue.
Just as "discretion" and "keeping secrets" are often interchangeable
with the latter often perceived as provocative, "develop" share features
with "hack" and "fork".
I deliberately wanted to provoke you. ;-)
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature